Mar.27,Thu. 7-8:30PM – The only political party with Pro-Life candidates meets at the MA College of Pharmacy, 19 Foster St., Worcester. Contact Bill McCarthy, 508-890-8855, mccarthy75@charter.net Includes Traditional Marriage Initiatives with Joanne Powell, Mass. Coalition for Marriage and Family and Pro-Life candidate Ronald Chernisky.http://www.worcestercountyrepublicanclub.comhttp://blog.worcestercountyrepublicanclub.com

Mar.29,Sat. Pro-Lifers: Come Aside and Be Refreshed. Sacred Heart in Webster. Coffee 9:30AM, Fr. Peter West from Priests for Life at 10AM and 1PM. Lunch provided, 4PM Mass with Bishop McManus. Come for all or part.

Apr.5-8,Sat-Tue. "Mission to the Family" Conference encompassing Theology on the Body.Apr.6,Sun. 1-1:30PM Problem Pregnancy is looking for a PREGNANT MARRIED MOM who will be between 10-14wks pregnant, willing to help with our chastity program by having a live ultrasound. We do this to show the students that the baby is alive and kicking at this young age and that it is not a "BLOB OF TISSUE" as the abortion clinic tells the girls. Please call Problem Pregnancy and ask for Kathy, 508-856-0700.

Pope Expected to Hold Catholic Colleges Accountable on Pro-Abortion Speakers by Steven Ertelt LifeNews.com Editor March 13, 2008Washington, DC (LifeNews.com) -- When he visits the United States next month, Pope Benedict XVI is expected to hold Catholic colleges accountable that have invited pro-abortion speakers to campus. The pontiff has requested an audience with more than 200 top officials from Catholic universities and he is expected to make it clear they need to follow Church teachings.http://www.lifenews.com/nat3799.html

How interesting that "Ellen" just created her profile. Did you make that profile so you could attack me anonymously Jay? It wouldn't be the first, second, or even third time this tactic has been used against me.

So much for the moral responsibility of honesty.

If people have something to say they should own up to it and not try to cast stones from the shadows.

John Hosty has challenged me to show him "where Jesus preached hate." Very well. In Luke 14:26, Jesus says: "If anyone comes to Me, and does not hate his own father and mother and wife and children and brothers and sisters, yes, and even his own life, he cannot be My disciple."

The hatred Jesus speaks of here is hatred of self-will. It is a refusal to put parents, spouse or even self before the Living God.

Mortal sins such as sodomy destroy the supernatural life of grace in the soul. Those who embrace mortal sin have repudiated the hatred Jesus speaks of. They burn with self-will. The Christian prays "Thy will be done" Lord. The soul on the path to Hell (unless it repents of mortal sin) prefers its own will. And in the end, Jesus will respect the soul's choice. And there the soul will reside for all eternity.

As Christians we hate sin while loving the one who sins. There is no contradiction here. Jesus told the woman caught in adultery to "go and sin no more." He didn't tell her to keep on sinning.

By the way John, many in the Nazi leadership were practicing homosexuals. I believe I addressed this in a previous thread.

If anyone is engaging in hatred toward persons, it is yourself. You came here and posted a veiled threat. Jay asked you who exactly has "noted" our "support of hatred" and you refused to provide an answer.

If my Google alert hadn't brought me here to see my name (before it was changed in marriage) I would not have come. Jay continues to invite me back with this sort of attention. If you don't want me to address you, stop speaking of me or with me.

You cannot wipe your sins away as easily as saying "well, they did it too", it doesn't work that way. You can call me a heathen and one of lost faith. That fits that I wouldn't be able to love the sinner and hate the sin. What's your excuse?

As Christians, we know we love the Lord and our neighbor when we keep His Commandments. This is how we know we love one another according to God's Word.

But you fail to keep His Word. This is proof that you do not love. Please do not confuse your lust with love. Lust is self-centered. Love cares about the well-being of an other. This includes telling the other the truth. In your case, that homosexual acts are gravely sinful objectively speaking and will lead [if unrepented of] to an eternity in Hell.

As for your "marriage," even if you must know in your conscience that same-sex "marriage" can never be valid.

Invited here? I don't remember JayG doing so. Kindly provide us with the proof of this assertion. And while you're at it John, perhaps you could also answer my previous question: Are you still slandering people at your Blog?

"Conversion: all our fallen-away friends and family members, Alan Lafley, John Hosty..."

There are many sins out there, one is touching the dead skin of a pig. Ever play football John? If you did you're burning in Hell right next to me.

My sins don't excuse your behavior. You have a Christian responsibility to behave as if you love all sinners, including me. In that way you might become a fisher of men yourself and win me back to Christ's favor. No such actions are here though, and that is not on my conscience, it's on yours. You own your actions, not me.

Just for the record, my name is Ellen Wironken. And although I only recently (three weeks ago) signed up for a blogger profile so that I could leave a comment at the Bldg 19 Blog - they won't permit comments without this. However, I have had a yahoo email address for some 8 years. If you would like, I could forward you a copy of an email written to me by a Catholic layman on February 22nd of this year, long before you claim Jay invited you back to this forum this past week. So much for your idiotic theory that I'm Jay.

In responding to John Ansley, you wrote, "My sins don't excuse your behavior. You have a Christian responsibility to behave as if you love all sinners, including me. In that way you might become a fisher of men yourself and win me back to Christ's favor."

I have witnessed no illicit or inappropriate behavior from John. Only yourself. Apparently any expression of disagreement with your distorted ideas is taken by you to represent "hostility." This is both childish and indicative of a diminished intellect.

And you admitted, perhaps without realizing it, that you are not in Christ's favor. Otherwise you would not have told John that by changing his behavior he "might become a fisher of men" himself "and win you back to Christ's favor.."

Think on that Mr. Hosty. That is the still small voice of conscience speaking to you.

Funny, "Ellen", how your talking points amount to the same exact hostility I see each and every time I visit here from the "Christians" present. Sorry, but I'll reserve the right to think you are just another face of Jay until you are proven otherwise.

I notice you skirt right over the Christian responsibility to love the sinner, why is that? Is the lesson not important when it refers to gay people?

"They exchanged the truth of God for a lie and revered and worshiped the creature rather than the creator, who is blessed forever. Amen.

Therefore, God handed them over to degrading passions. Their females exchanged natural relations for unnatural,

and the males likewise gave up natural relations with females and burned with lust for one another. Males did shameful things with males and thus received in their own persons the due penalty for their perversity.

And since they did not see fit to acknowledge God, God handed them over to their undiscerning mind to do what is improper.

They are filled with every form of wickedness, evil, greed, and malice; full of envy, murder, rivalry, treachery, and spite. They are gossips

and scandalmongers and they hate God. They are insolent, haughty, boastful, ingenious in their wickedness, and rebellious toward their parents.

They are senseless, faithless, heartless, ruthless.

Although they know the just decree of God that all who practice such things deserve death, they not only do them but give approval to those who practice them."

You wouldn't understand the answer John. In John 14:15-17, Jesus tells us, "If you love me, you will keep my commandments. And I will ask the Father, and he will give you another Advocate to be with you always, the Spirit of truth, which the world cannot accept, because it neither sees nor knows it."

Truth and charity are connected John. But you will never see this because you cannot. Your notion of charity is a false one. If we love Jesus, we keep His Commandents. The reason you do not keep His Commandments is that you do not love Him.

And your hatred of Jesus is also expressed in your hatred of neighbor. Your promotion of the sodomite lifestyle harms the common good. But again, you don't care because the only thing you live for is satisfying your appetites and lusts.

I find it interesting that all I have to do is read one of the threads here from last year where I spent some time posting to find the same exact comments about me said in identical fashion. That is a truly interesting coincidence, but I'll play along for form's sake.

I've never subscribed to telling someone (especially someone I don't know) what I believe their faults to be, no matter how right I think I am. If nothing else it's uncooth. Surely one can conduct oneself in a less embarassing fashion.

It's absurd for you to say I "hate" Christ. On what basis would you make such an inflamatory claim? I charge that it is you who is motivated by hate, hence your hasty accusations.

On the contrary, I love you as you are, sins and all (yes, you sin too). I'm just not very proud of the way you're conducting youself at the moment. In your passion to put me in my place you have fallen far from His will.

If Christ walked the Earth today he would tell us to put our differences aside and love one another for who we are today.

It starts with love, not hate; with inclusion, not exclusion.

Saying I hate Christ was a lie. Not only is lying a sin, but bearing false witness against your neighbor breaks one of the Ten Commandments. I expect you have some thinking to do on this matter.

You may not think I deserve an explanation, but the people that read this blog will be asking themselves why you would make such a reckless charge without even knowing me. That speaks of your character and your honesty.

Yes we are all sinners John. But not all sins are mortal. Your sodomite lifetsyle is gravely sinful. And as Ellen said, evidence of your hatred of Christ. By rejecting Christ's Commandments, you are testifying to your hatred of Him and your preference of your own will over His.

Your continued attacks on Ellen are further proof of your hate. You have falsely accused Jay of being Ellen just as you slandered Larry Cirignano at your Blog and at this forum.

Until you repent of your slander and of your gravely sinful homosexual lifestyle, you are not in communion with the Lord Jesus.

"They exchanged the truth of God for a lie and revered and worshiped the creature rather than the creator, who is blessed forever. Amen.

Therefore, God handed them over to degrading passions. Their females exchanged natural relations for unnatural,

and the males likewise gave up natural relations with females and burned with lust for one another. Males did shameful things with males and thus received in their own persons the due penalty for their perversity.

And since they did not see fit to acknowledge God, God handed them over to their undiscerning mind to do what is improper.

They are filled with every form of wickedness, evil, greed, and malice; full of envy, murder, rivalry, treachery, and spite. They are gossips

and scandalmongers and they hate God. They are insolent, haughty, boastful, ingenious in their wickedness, and rebellious toward their parents.

They are senseless, faithless, heartless, ruthless.

Although they know the just decree of God that all who practice such things deserve death, they not only do them but give approval to those who practice them."

"'How sad it is,' he said, 'That the Church should be so obsessed with this particular issue of human sexuality when God's children are facing massive problems-- poverty, disease, corruption, conflict...'" ~Arch-Bishop Tutu

http://www.christianlgbtrights.org/

Your denial of Christ's powerful message of love is a mistruth in and of itself. Love conquers all, even your fear of those you find unworthy.

Marie, people don't love death just because they're gay. I don't think even you believe that so I don't know why you would try to pass it off as truth to others.

We have work that we can do together that is more important than trying to judge me or condemn me for my life choices.

My grandmother told me that back in the old days it was considered in poor taste to point out someone else's faults. You see my homosexuality as a fault, but where is your grace to look past that and try reaching the brother you have through Christ?

Do not disgrace yourself by speaking poorly of a person whom you've never met. Instead, you could talk civily using logic to bring dignity to your opinions.

I thought you were finished with this forum John. At any rate, it is not I who condemn you. You stand condemned by your embrace of sodomy and your refusal to confess this grave sin or even to acknowledge it as sin.

Romans Chapter 1 teaches us clearly that those who exchange the natural use of sex for unnatural and perverted lust deserve death. Therefore, those who engage in homosexuality love death.

It is Sacred Scripture which indicts you. And on the Day of Judgment, you will have to explain your choices in life. They are yours. And you alone will answer for them.

I suspect you have very powerful doubts yourself about the legitimacy of your "lifestyle." That's why you continue to return here. You are like a deer caught in the headlights. You want to move on but you cannot because you are mesmerized by the bright lights which will [ultimately] result in your destruction.

Deep-down, you know that what you are doing is wrong. You know it with every fiber of your being. You just cannot steel yourself to admit it. Your pride won't let you.

And by the way, you wrote:

"My grandmother told me that back in the old days it was considered in poor taste to point out someone else's faults. You see my homosexuality as a fault, but where is your grace to look past that and try reaching the brother you have through Christ?"

And yet, whenever you post here, you almost invariably cast stones at those who won't accept your sinful lifestyle or attempt to make you feel comfortable in it. You are quick to point out what you perceive as our "faults." Namely, our acceptance of Scripture and Church teaching regarding homosexuality. I wonder if your grandmother would consider that to be in "poor taste"?

We are taught by Christ that all people are sinners, and that judgement is best left to He who sees into the hearts of men. You don't have to agree with someone's lifestyle in order to treat them with the common courtesy you'd expect from a stranger.

Instead you hide your hate behind the reason of scripture and try to use the Bible an excuse for your shortcomings as a Christian. It seems to me that you see the opportunity to be the light of Christ to GLBT people like spoke of in the past, you simply chose your revulsion over God's calling. I'll pray for your strength that you overcome this fault and learn how to love as Christ commands.

In short Marie, you can make your points without sounding so hateful.

I'm curious Marie, if you are so against GLBT equality why didn't you sign the petition to end gay marriage? Your name does not appear on our website, yet we listed everyone. Is Marie Tremblay your given name?

Marie, John Hosty is insecure in his adolescent rebellion from the Lord Jesus. Unable to justify his perversity in his own mind, he comes here in a vain attempt to receive a blessing for his sodomite way of life.

John Hosty hates God and neighbor. This is why he refuses to abide by God's Commandments.

John,A few points;ArchBishop Desmond Tutu is Anglican, not Roman Catholic.We need to define love if we are going to debate it: Love means unity of wills (i.e. God the Father and Jesus the Son), it is self giving, it is permanent and faithful, it respects the human dignity of the person that is a gift from God. When it is not self-giving it will become self love, which is not love because their is not union of wills, only a mutual convenience.

This is why marriage between complementary sexes is a model for love while same sex unions are not. That is why Jesus said marriage was between one man and one woman, Jesus was stating the Natural order of things.

William, can you justify why you say I hate God and neighbor? From my point of view it seems like you are simply casting unfounded dispersions against your neighbor, which is a violation of one of the Ten Commandments (bearing false witness).

If your answer is that I hate God because I am an active homosexual then don't bother answering. You know as well as anyone reading this that people are not a stereotype; we are all indiviuals deserving of the respect our actions afford us. It is not only the American standard of justice, it is the same standard that God promises to judge us by.

That brings me to my next point, I come here out of compassion. This website is affiliated with the hate of MassResistance.com, which promotes lies against GLBT people. Do you think that God would approve of lies being used to attack what you think His enemies to be?

Jay, great to see you join us in your own form. ;) Yes, I am aware that Tutu is not Catholic as covered on my blog, but he is more importantly Christian, and his leadership is one which helps heal the barriers between our two worlds. Love, not exclusion will be the healing tool that brings us all together. Feel free to visit my website and read his words for yourself:

The true message that Christ left us with was one of unconditional love. He showed us this example for dying at the hands of His oppressors and washed away all sin through His grace, not our merits. It is said that no one is worthy through their actions, not even you Jay.

unconditional love does not condone sin, indeed it cannot condone sin. Would a parent be showing love to their child if they condoned drug use, if they helped the child purchase drugs?

I think Benedict XVI has the right approach to our brothers with homosexual tendencies, and to the contradiction in terms that is same-sex marriage: "The marital union of man and woman has been elevated by Christ to the dignity of a sacrament. The Church teaches that Christian marriage is an efficacious sign of the covenant between Christ and the Church."

There are those who like to say that the Bible does not condemn homosexuality. Various verses are cited (out of context) and the verses that people use to show that homosexuality is wrong are explained away. The world wants to change God's words and meanings into something more suitable to its sinful desires. Nevertheless, the truth stands: The Bible condemns homosexuality as a sin. Let's look at what it says.

Lev. 18:22, "You shall not lie with a male as one lies with a female; it is an abomination."

Lev. 20:13, "If there is a man who lies with a male as those who lie with a woman, both of them have committed a detestable act; they shall surely be put to death. Their bloodguiltness is upon them"

Rom. 1:26-28, "For this reason God gave them over to degrading passions; for their women exchanged the natural function for that which is unnatural, 27and in the same way also the men abandoned the natural function of the woman and burned in their desire toward one another, men with men committing indecent acts and receiving in their own persons the due penalty of their error. 28And just as they did not see fit to acknowledge God any longer, God gave them over to a depraved mind, to do those things which are not proper."

Homosexuality is clearly condemned by the Bible. It goes against the created order of God. He created Adam and then made a woman. This is what God has ordained and it is what is right. Unlike other sins, homosexuality has a severe judgment administered by God Himself. This judgment is simple: They are given over to their passions. That means that their hearts are allowed to be hardened by their sins (Romans 1:18ff). As a result, they can no longer see the error of what they are doing. Without an awareness of their sinfulness, there will be no repentance and trusting in Jesus. Without Jesus, they will have no forgiveness. Without forgiveness, there is no salvation.

What should be the Christian's Response to the Homosexual?

Just because someone is a homosexual does not mean that we cannot love him (or her) or pray for him (her). Homosexuality is a sin and like any other sin, it needs to be dealt with in the only way possible. It needs to be laid at the cross, repented of, and never done again. As a Christian, you should pray for the salvation of the homosexual the same you would any other person in sin. The homosexual is still made in the image of God -- even though he is in grave sin. Therefore, you should show him same dignity as anyone else you come in contact with. However, this does not mean that you are to approve of their sin. Don't compromise your witness for a socially acceptable opinion that is void of godliness.

William, you've added another question for me to ask; where does Jesus teach exclusion? Can you cite the passage for me, I want to read it myself so I can make sure you're not misunderstanding it as what happened when I brought up Romans 14 last year on this website:

1Accept him whose faith is weak, without passing judgment on disputable matters.

4Who are you to judge someone else's servant? To his own master he stands or falls.

10You, then, why do you judge your brother? Or why do you look down on your brother? For we will all stand before God's judgment seat.

11It is written: " 'As surely as I live,' says the Lord, 'every knee will bow before me; every tongue will confess to God.' "[a] 12So then, each of us will give an account of himself to God.

13Therefore let us stop passing judgment on one another. Instead, make up your mind not to put any stumbling block or obstacle in your brother's way.

19Let us therefore make every effort to do what leads to peace and to mutual edification. 20Do not destroy the work of God for the sake of food.

22So whatever you believe about these things keep between yourself and God. Blessed is the man who does not condemn himself by what he approves.

When I had posted this last year for discussion it was told to me that this was about diet back in ancient times, which is far from the truth. I had a friend who is a Phd in theology go over it with me, and he agrees strongly that this passage is about unconditional love for your neighbors.

Ask yourself if food can be a metaphore for faith, then ask why else would the title of the passage have "weak" and "strong" written in it.

It asks us to put aside our differences and become a source of elevation to God for one another.

I "eat" from faith because I know in my heart Christ does not condemn my actions, only His misguided followers do. Those who are so caught up with how they feel that they cannot look up to see Him in those they revile.

My coming here and suffering the ourageous slings and arrows that are thrown at me is in and of itself an act of contrition, humility, and compassion. I am not embittered by these words, I forgive your trespasses against me as I would have you forgive my trespasses against you.

I believe we are here for at least two reasons, to glorify God with our thanks, and to spread the joy God brings to others so that they can feel Christ's presence in their own lives.

In Leviticus 18 it goes into detail about who not to have sex with, and one of the lines is for men to not have sex with other men. This is where most lesbians smile and show that they were not mentioned. The chapter also goes on to say:

29 " 'Everyone who does any of these detestable things—such persons must be cut off from their people. 30 Keep my requirements and do not follow any of the detestable customs that were practiced before you came and do not defile yourselves with them. I am the LORD your God.' "

So do we turn our backs on those who have committed adultery in the same like fashion you would someone who is gay? No, but I'll bet you have a good answer for that too. Again the double talk has led to double standards.

I'm sure that answer is as forthcoming as William's answer as to why he tells people I hate God.

While all of you claim to be holier than me simply because you are born straight, your actions that define you leave you far from Him. Your very attitude (one of anger and revulsion) proves that His love is not guiding you at that moment.

When you can look at the most wretched of our society and see Christ behind their eyes, and invite them to your table, then you will understand:

JOB 17:9

9 Nevertheless, the righteous will hold to their ways, and those with clean hands will grow stronger.

During the unfair persecution of Job he was tourmented by "mockers" which I see a lot of you to be. The righteous are the ones who can say their minds with dignity and keep their hands clean. The righteous have no need for such unChristian trivialities as an insult.

Yet working together we might be able to bring peace and co-operative efforts. I say that is a just cause worth biting my tongue and swallowing my pride for.

My guess is that most of you see the value as well. You just need to come to the edge of the fence and talk for once about what we DO have in comon, and maybe the good we can do with that!

John,Romans 14 is about Jewish dietary laws and how or if they should apply to christians, and about the possibility of eating with Gentiles who were pagans who may have sacrificed their animals to a false god, and whether or not eating at their banquets would cause scandal. Kind of like how same-sex marriage causes scandal, which is why even though we love our gay brothers, cousins and friends, we can't attend their weddings.

William the complete statement reads---"Just because someone is a homosexual does not mean that we cannot love him (or her) or pray for him (her). Homosexuality is a sin and like any other sin, it needs to be dealt with in the only way possible.

"It needs to be laid at the cross, repented of, and never done again."

Also William, as for John Hosty, I have never come across anyone who such an ability to distort Holy Scripture in his defense and who can take Holy Scripture and make it somehow support that which is an abomination, a serious offense againt God's Law.

And he keeps saying that we do not know him, which may be true on a personal level, but he sure has made himself very well known by his words which are an expression of his inmost thoughts and beliefs.

Exclusion: [Middle English exclusioun, from Latin exclūsiō, exclūsiōn-, from exclūsus, past participle of exclūdere, to shut; see exclude.]

noun.1. an act or instance of excluding. 2. the state of being excluded. 3. Physiology. a keeping apart; blocking of an entrance.

Please cite the passage that says Jesus told us told turn our backs on any sinner for any reason. You can't because no such direction was ever given from the Prince of Peace. He told us two great commendments were above all else; love God and love your neighbor.

You cannot cite me an example in the Bible where it calls for you to be disrespectful to who you think are sinners. This is not an action called by God, but rather your own emotions coming out in an ugly form. That form is incompatible with the Christian ways of peace and love.

Jay, you might want to get tutored in scripture if you really think Romans 14 is about diet. You attempt to push that opinion as fact shows your ignorance.

William, the posting I titled "To Whom it may concern" -- are not my thoughts. I made the error of not making known the author. I have been trying to search the site, but right now I am not able to bring it up. When I do, I will make known the author. I do recall that the thoughts are those of a Catholic woman.

The Catholic Church teaches that those who die in a state of mortal sin, including Catholics, shall be excluded from the Kingdom of God. (C.C.C. # 1861) What are these mortal sins that can impede one's entry into the Kingdom of God? Reference to some of these sins are found in the Sacred text of the Holy Bible.

In the Letter to the Galatians, we read, "Now the works of the flesh are plain: fornication, impurity, licentiousness, idolatry, sorcery, enmity, strife, jealousy, anger, selfishness, dissension, factions, envy, drunkenness, carousing, and the like. I warn you, as I warned you before, that those who do such things shall not inherit the Kingdom of God." (Gal. 5:19-10; C.C.C. # 1852)

In the First Letter to the Corinthians, we read, "Do you not know that wrongdoers will not inherit the Kingdom of God? Do not be deceived! Fornicators, idolaters, adulterers, male prostitutes, sodomites, thieves, the greedy, drunkards, revilers, robbers - none of these will inherit the Kingdom of God." [1 Cor. 6:9-10]

Two Chapters later, we read, "Whoever, therefore, eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be answerable for the body and blood of the Lord. Examine yourselves, and only then eat of the bread and drink of the cup. For all who eat and drink without discerning the body, eat and drink judgment against themselves. For this reason many of you are weak and ill, and some have died." [1 Cor. 11:27-30]

In the Gospel of Luke, we read, "And everyone who speaks a word against the Son of Man will be forgiven: but whoever blasphemes against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven." [Lk. 12:10]

In the Revelation to John, we read, "Those who conquer will inherit these things, and I will be their God and they will be my children. But as for the cowardly, the faithless, the polluted, the murderers, the fornicators, the sorcerers, the idolaters, and all liars, their place will be in the lake that burns with fire and sulphur, which is the second death." [Rev. 21:7-8]

"Outside (of the Kingdom of God) are the dogs and sorcerers and fornicators and murderers and idolaters, and everyone who loves and practices falsehood." [Rev. 22:15]

These Biblical passages declare that, Catholic or not, those who chose through their free will to turn away from the holy ways, the righteousness of God, because of their mortal sins, they eternally condemn themselves.

William, I understand fully the consequences of my actions according to the Catholic religion. We agree on what is said here, although the other passages that contradict these points will always have equal value. What we are having difficulty coming to an understanding on is what role the good Christian plays when they come across a sinner.

You seem to think that the passages you cite give you license to turn your back on your fellow man, or to even insult those like me. In my understanding of Christianity there is no need to berate or belittle our neighbors.

Let me ask you a question; if I were in a car driving by you and you were broken down, would you wave me on when I stopped, or would you allow me to help you?

We haven't turned our back on you. We just refuse to justify you in your mortal sin. Because we haven't turned our backs on you, we are standing by the side of the road shouting at the tops of our lungs, "Watch out John Hosty, you're heading for a cliff."

Your response? You step on the gas and give us the finger as you sip from a can of beer and laugh at how "ignorant" we are.

John,There is no confusion about Rom14, it's in an Epistle that compares and contrasts the old Testament and Law for Jews, which included dietary restrictions, with the New Testament and Law where Jesus declared that it is not food that makes one unclean, but the envies and abominations that we spew from our mouths.St. Paul is counseling his Christian leaning charges not to give scandal to the Jewish leaning charges by eating unclean foods, even though this was no longer against the New Law of Jesus and the new Testament.Rom14:13 "Let us not therefore judge one another any more. But judge this rather, that you put not a stumbling block or a scandal in your brother's way. 14 I know, and am confident in the Lord Jesus, that nothing is unclean of itself: but to him that esteemeth any thing to be unclean, to him it is unclean. 15 For if, because of thy meat[food], thy brother be grieved, thou walkest not now according to charity. Destroy not him with thy meat[food], for whom Christ died. 16 Let not then our good be evil spoken of. 17 For the kingdom of God is not meat and drink: but justice and peace and joy in the Holy Ghost."

Even if you try to read secondary meanings into the text, it in no way allows for same-sex marriage, and in no way indicates that charity involves acceptance of homosexual acts.

As far as getting tutored in Scripture, I recommend St. John Chrysostom, who in his Homily 26 on the Epistle to the Romans says "For keeping a person from meats is no such matter as overwhelming with grief."Chrysostom is saying more eloquently than I ever could that this is about not just diet, but avoiding scandal through charity."Why not correct your brother, that he may think it not unclean? Why not with full authority call him away from this habit of mind and conception of things, that he may never make it common? My reason is, he says, I am afraid to grieve him. Wherefore he proceeds,

Ver. 15. "But if your brother be grieved with your meat, now you do not walk charitably."

You see how far, for the present, he goes in affection for him, showing that he makes so great account of him, that with a view not to grieve him he does not venture even to enjoin things of great urgency, but by yieldingness would rather draw him to himself, and by charity. For even when he has freed him of his fears, he does not drag him and force him, but leaves him his own master. For keeping a person from meats is no such matter as overwhelming with grief."

In effect John, you may have one small point, which you exaggerate and twist and mis-apply: We should be charitable when we condemn your public same-sex marriage, but we should not condemn you as a person.

Jay, as far as the meaning of Romans 14 goes and how I feel about what is going on here feel free to read my blog's article titled, "Christian Grace". There is an explanation of about the meaning of Romans 14 as well as a second version written in common language.

Call me a sinner, the worst in the world above all others if you want. You do no honor to yourself or God by turning me away from your table or by calling me names.

It seems like for you and some few others out there the sin of homosexuality is so great as cannot be forgiven. Why else would you treat a brother in Christ who you think has lost his way like he cannot be redeemed?

For once let's talk about what is the proper way for you to conduct yourself around those with whom you disagree. I see your efforts falling far short of the mark Christ left for us, I'd like to here where the Bible calls to mock me and say I hate God.

Let no Christian become so arrogant and pompus as to say they can look into the heart of a man they've never even met, see that he will never change, and judge him as unworthy of the the dignity of an effort to bring them back to Christ.

John Hosty, you are the only one who has exhibited hatred and threats at this forum. You returned to this site telling us that our opposition to sodomite "marriage" was being noted.

Love means telling people the truth. And the truth is that you are rejecting God's Law of Love by rejecting His Commandments.

Jesus said, "If you love Me, keep My Commandments." This is the test of our love for Him. But because you do not love Him, you reject His Commandments.

Homosexual acts are gravely sinful John. I wouldn't be saying this to you publically if you weren't publically promoting same-sex "marriage" while publically condoning homosexual acts. But because you are challenging the Church and rejecting God's Law of Love publically, I have the right, and even the duty, to challenge you publically to repent and return to the sacraments.

Once again, you initiated this discussion. Once again, you came here with vague threats regarding someone or some entity noting our opposition to same-sex "marriage."

The teaching of the Church regarding homosexual acts is crystal clear. The teaching of Sacred Scripture is crystal clear on this matter.

The reason you cannot see this is because you are blind. As often as you promote the lie that charity means condoning sin, I will insist that you are mistaken. Charity means speaking the truth to another. An authentic charity is rooted in love of God first. Read paragraph 1822 of the Catechism. Charity is first love of God. When we put the creature before the Creator, we sin. This is what Paul says in Romans 1. They preferred the creature rather than the Creator. And so God delivers such people up to their own reprobate minds.

John,I try to avoid name calling, because it really does involve judging a person's interior dispostion, their knowledge and formation in the faith, their culpability if you will. I try to stick with labeling behaviors.

However, I do think it a logical conlusion that if someone knew what God expected of them, and freely and willfully choose to do the opposite, then you could conclude that that person hates God. The difficulty is not the logic, it is in assessing whether one is acting willfully and with full consent, if they know what they do, as Jesus said on the cross.

As for your isogesis of Rom14, I would only add that when one is trying to defend a contradiction in terms (same-sex marriage), one's tactics would probably have to include confusion.

Jay, I agree with your statement that, "I do think it a logical conlusion that if someone knew what God expected of them, and freely and willfully choose to do the opposite, then you could conclude that that person hates God."

John Hosty has said that he knows and undertands the Church's teaching on homosexuality. In other words, what God expects of us with regard to such behavior. And yet, he chooses to disregard this teaching and to follow his own will. Objectively speaking, he is committing mortal sins. His culpability will be judged by God alone. But just as we cannot judge John Hosty's soul (declaring him fully culpable for the acts he is committing) so he cannot absolve himself in this or any other forum. God alone will judge his culpability in the end. But objectively speaking, his actions are mortally sinful.

I think our State Legislators would benefit from Mr. Melanson's article on false compassion. Even very many Catholics. This site is also very interesting. I followed the link from Mr. Melanson's site. Keep up the good work of exposing the myths propagated by the homosexual movement. You are making a difference. Slowly but surely.

Pope Saint Pius X, in his 1910 Catechism, teaches us that sodomy ranks second in gravity to voluntary homicide, among the sins that "cry out to God for vengeance." According to this Catechism, these sins "are said to cry out to God because the Holy Spirit says so and because their iniquity is so grave and manifest that it provokes God to punish with more severe chastisements."

The Catechism of the Catholic Church published by the Vatican in 1994 teaches clearly that homosexuality is contrary to nature and that homosexual acts are among the "sins gravely contrary to chastity." (CCC, 2396). This Catechism teaches that homosexual acts are "intrinsically disordered," "contrary to the natural law," and that "under no circumstances can they be approved." (CCC, 2357).

In a discussion thread which may be found here homosexual activist John Hosty [from Massachusetts] is attempting to convince others that Christian "compassion" for homosexual persons should leave such individuals comfortable in their sin.

Now while it is true that everything must be done to help sinners, this cannot include helping them to sin or to remain in sin. Because of human frailty, every sinner deserves both pity and compassion. However, vice and sin must be excluded from this compassion. This because sin can never be the proper object of compassion. (Summa Theologica, II-II, q. 30, a.1, ad 1).

It is a false compassion which supplies the sinner with the means to remain attached to sin. Such "compassion" provides an assistance (whether material or moral) which actually enables the sinner to remain firmly attached to his evil ways. By contrast, true compassion leads the sinner away from vice and back to virtue. As Thomas Aquinas explains:

"We love sinners out of charity, not so as to will what they will, or to rejoice in what gives them joy, but so as to make them will what we will, and rejoice in what rejoices us. Hence it is written: 'They shall be turned to thee, and thou shalt not be turned to them.'" (St. Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica, II-II, q. 25, a.6, ad 4, citing Jeremiah 15:19).

St. Thomas Aquinas teaches us that the sentiment of compassion only becomes a virtue when it is guided by reason, since "it is essential to human virtue that the movements of the soul should be regulated by reason." (Summa Theologica, II-II, q. 30, c.3). Without such regulation, compassion is merely a passion. A false compassion is a compassion not regulated and tempered by reason and is, therefore, a potentially dangerous inclination. This because it is subject to favoring not only that which is good but also that which is evil (Summa Theologica, II-II, q. 30, a.1, ad 3).

An authentic compassion always stems from charity. True compassion is an effect of charity (Summa Theologica, II-II, q. 30, a.3, ad 3). But it must be remembered that the object of this virtue is God, whose love extends to His creatures. (Summa Theologica, II-II, q. 25, a.3). Therefore, the virtue of compassion seeks to bring God to the one who suffers so that he may thereby participate in the infinite love of God. As St. Augustine explains:

"'Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself.' Now, you love yourself suitably when you love God better than yourself. What, then, you aim at in yourself you must aim at in your neighbor, namely, that he may love God with a perfect affection." (St. Augustine, Of the Morals of the Catholic Church, No. 49, which may be found here: http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/1401.htm).

Please pray for Mr. Hosty and other misguided individuals who believe that compassion toward homosexual persons means showing acceptance of homosexual behavior. For such false compassion actually serves to harm the one chained to vice as well as the common good.

We wish for you what we wish for ourselves: that you may "love God with a perfect affection." We wish that you would return to Communion with Jesus. Right now you are not. It is good that you have now admitted this. You wrote, "There is nothing to argue here, I violate Catholic law."

Since you now admit freely that you violate Catholic law, you must also admit that you reject the Church's teaching willingly and purposefully. In other words, you hate the Lord Jesus because you intentionally rejec His Commandments.

Jay, our talks seem to always skirt around the same points. First off, I'm a sinner to your standards, which are not my standards. I don't see a need to continually talk about it. It's a done deal, I'm gay, so let's move on to other subjects.

I see the use of dishonesty as a serious offense against God, but here it is thrown around like a toy one would play with. Does it amuse you to see people insult me by saying I hate God and my neighbor? I hope not, yet your inactions while this takes place silently condones the disrespect I've suffered time and time again on your website.

You also seem to want to refuse to acknowledge that Christians have a responsibility handed down by God Himself to behave as loving brothers and sisters to each other. Love the sinner right? How much love are we showing if we are constantly berating them? The answer is none.

I have a neighbor that is a stout Catholic, and she pressures me all the time to change my evil ways. The difference with her is that she will act as a loving Christian to anyone that will let her, not just the ones she finds worthy. She gets past my sins to see the good, loving, honest man I am instead focusing on what she sees as my faults.

If I were a drunkard you would not put me out on the street for being a sinner, even though I continue to sin. Were I a killer you'd still have someone come to my cell to comfort me should I ask. Yet because I am gay I can't get you to show enough respect to even refrain from insult me long enough to have a productive conversation.

That's not God motivating those actions, the blame is your own. For once I wish you'd be a man about it and admit this as your own shortcoming.

I continue to be dissapointed, but I still forgive you for your trespasses in the same loving nature I always do. I just wish you'd try a little harder to see the Christ in all of us, not just the ones you respect.

I hold out for hope under Christ's orders. I will continue my dialog with you as long as I am afforded the ability, and I will keep hope that one day we can sit at the same table unworried about our stance with the Lord. Unworried because we are living as He commands; in peace.

John,Your playing the victim while simultaneously insulting, intimidating and mis-representing the Gospels certainly makes it difficult for one to turn the other cheek, but then again if it were easy there would be no merit in it. But I refute your claim that you are a sinner by my standards. My Standards have nothing to do with it.Also, Jesus is Peace, He did not command us to live in peace in the worldly sense of which you speak. In fact He even said "Do not think that I came to send peace upon earth: I came not to send peace, but the sword." Mt10:34. This is because hard truths require changed lives.

Jay correctly writes, "Your playing the victim while simultaneously insulting, intimidating and mis-representing the Gospels certainly makes it difficult for one to turn the other cheek, but then again if it were easy there would be no merit in it. But I refute your claim that you are a sinner by my standards. My Standards have nothing to do with it."

We must not confuse frankness with rudeness. Frankness is complete honesty with others. It is based on a high regard for the truth. Where truth is expected and at issue, we should always give our frank opinion. By contrast, rudeness is careless insensitivity or intentional affront to others. What is rudely sad may or may not be an expression of what is true, but it always offends others unnecessarily.

I have decided not to post a comment left at my Blog and written by Mr. Hosty because, as Jay has noted so well, while Mr. Hosty demands to be treated with civility himself, he is apparently not too concerned with imparting it to others. Some time back, even though I had defended Mr. Hosty from a truly inappropriate comment (as had Jay to his credit) and even though my opposition to homosexuality doesn't include hatred or disdain for the homosexual person, Mr. Hosty publically referred to me as a "bigot." I deleted his comment left at my Blog and addressed this issue here at DTF.

This libellous remark was most unfortunate and a glaring example of that incivility which Mr. Hosty sees in others even as it has damaged his approach toward others.

Politeness is the genuine effort to treat others with courtesy and respect - even those we do not know or may not like. Phoniness is a fake show of respect for others in order to protect or benefit ourselves. Such "courtesy" is entirely on the surface. It is not a commendable thing at all since the key to all good actions is intention, and the intention of phoniness is selfish.

Was Jesus being rude to the Pharisees when He referred to them as "sons of Hell," "a perverse and adulterous generation," "brood of vipers," "hypocrites," "white-washed tombs"? Of course not. Again, frankness is complete honesty with others. It demonstrates and is based upon a high regard for truth. Here, the purpose is not to offend for the sake of offending. But to offend for the sake of truth. Jesus loved the Pharisees enough to speak the hard truh to them.

Jay, your responses to John Hosty are greatly appreciated. You have clearly shown how off the track he is.

William and Paul are also to be given credit for their responses. As negative and hopless it appears for John's situation which is indeed an evil, there is a good that comes forth. It is only God Who can bring good from the evil and the good is that the truth is having its day throughtout this discussion.

Frankness and rudeness are not synonymous. The line from frankness to rudeness has been crossed many times by bloggers here. An example of rudeness is when William claimed I hate God and my neighbor. If you want to talk about libel you should look within yourselves at some of the other unfounded things said against me.

Any excuse you come up with for poor behavior is just that; an excuse.

Christians are not supposed to take the role of judge that Christ reserves for himself.

"Let he who is without sin cast the first stone!" This is pretty basic stuff guys, you can't draw sinners to God when you treat them poorly.

When you allow yourself to focus too much on the negative things in life you become jaded. When you become too negative God's gift of life seems turned into a curse, and that to me is an outright tragedy.

The anomousity here is deeply disturbing and very unChristian. I'll continue to pray for all of you here that you may one day be able to look past someone's inherent qualities to find the individual within.

It must also be remembered that relativism and subjectivism can also be close-minded. It is quite possible to be closed-minded in holding that one religion is as good as another and that whatever people think right actually is right for them. Relativists and subjectivists constantly talk about civility and moderation, but they are not immune from intolerance and fanaticism. Indeed, relativists and subjectivists are especially tempted to be arbitrary self-righteous. This because they acknowledge neither a higher reality to which all realistic people must submit nor an objective moral standard by which all conscientious people must criticize themselves.

Unable to call on their opponents to submit to principles which any reasonable person should accept - their views exclude such principles - relativists and subjectivists inevitably will be tempted to use nonrational methods such as manipulation and even suppression in order to prevail.

As Jay so astutely noted, Mr. Hosty has employed a form of manipulation here at Defend the Faith, "playing the victim while simultaneously insulting, intimidating and mis-representing the Gospels.."

"playing the victim while simultaneously insulting, intimidating and mis-representing the Gospels.."

Please show me where I insulted anyone, or used intimidation. I quoted the Gospel straight out of the Bible, there were no misrepresentations. If you choose to disagree with me, at least make an effort to be accurate and honest instead of deliberately misleading readers.

Just because you don't like gay people does not give you an exception with God to lie, like when William said I hated God and my neighbors.

you can villianize me all you want, it does not change your accountability for your own actions.

Let me say thank you to the few emails I have gotten in support of my struggle hear. It's nice to know that those who speak on this blog are not the sum total of all Catholics out there. Let us pray together that they find God's strength within themselves, and turn away from hate, for that is not His way.

Well, since you asked John;Threats, insults, slander, presumptuous blather – "Your public support of hatred has been noted.""you[r] attempt to push that opinion as fact shows your ignorance.""So much for the moral responsibility of honesty""You cannot wipe your sins away as easily as saying ‘well, they did it too’,""Sorry [Ellen], but I'll reserve the right to think you are just another face of Jay until you are proven otherwise…I'll pray that you are able to see the error of hating those you don't know based on presumptions.""I'm just not very proud of the way you're conducting you[r]self at the moment. In your passion to put me in my place you have fallen far from His will.""Your denial of Christ's powerful message of love is a mistruth in and of itself""Do not disgrace yourself by speaking poorly of a person whom you've never met""you simply chose your revulsion over God's calling. I'll pray for your strength that you overcome this fault and learn how to love as Christ commands""This website is affiliated with the hate of MassResistance.com, which promotes lies against GLBT people. Do you think that God would approve of lies being used to attack what you think His enemies to be?""It is said that no one is worthy through their actions, not even you Jay""I 'eat' from faith because I know in my heart Christ does not condemn my actions, only His misguided followers do.""My coming here and suffering the ourageous slings and arrows that are thrown at me is in and of itself an act of contrition, humility, and compassion."

"This [Liviticus18] is where most lesbians smile and show that they were not mentioned.""During the unfair persecution of Job he was tormented by 'mockers' which I see a lot of you to be"

Scripture-baiting: "Jay, you might want to get tutored in scripture if you really think Romans 14 is about diet." Except John forgot to mention he left off the following 'diet' verses when he quoted Rm14 "For one believeth that he may eat all things: but he that is weak, let him eat herbs. Let not him that eateth despise him that eateth not…And he that eateth eateth to the Lord…For if, because of thy meat[food], thy brother be grieved, thou walkest not now according to charity. Destroy not him with thy meat[food], for whom Christ died."14:2-3,7,15 So you mischaracterized my point as being only about "diet" when in fact I said "Romans 14 is about Jewish dietary laws and how or if they should apply to christians, and about the possibility of eating with Gentiles who were pagans who may have sacrificed their animals to a false god, and whether or not eating at their banquets would cause scandal" in order to take a cheap shot a our Scriptural exegesis.

John, you wrote, "I could spend time refuting each one of these [Jay's] points.."

I'd really like to see that.

You have continually confused, as Paul has shown, frankness with rudeness. And after Paul explained the difference, you wrote, "Frankness and rudeness are not synonymous." But that's precisely the point John. They are not the same thing.

You have written some very rude things - for the sake of being rude. And the list compiled by Jay nearly knocked me out of my chair. I hadn't realized just how rude you had been.

I'm curious John, after Larry Cirignano was acquited and you continued to slander him by insisting that he was guilty, was that an example of incivility in your mind? How about your labelling Paul a bigot at his Blog? Was that incivility? What did you base your accusation of bigotry on John? Kindly show me where Paul ever said anything inappropriate with regard to your person.

And what about your slander of Jay? You wrote, "I'll continue to pray that you can let go of your hate and embrace Christ's commandments." Which one of Christ's commandments has Jay not embraced? I'm really curious. And where has he shown any "hate"? I have only witnessed the comments of a Catholic gentleman. I only wish I had as much patience with provocateurs.

No John, your manipulation just won't work at this forum. You might get away with those adolescent tactics at a GLBT meeting. But here in Catholic Land, we believe in a little thing called reason.

William, since you asked I'll give you some examples of why your wrong, but I'm not going to bother chasing down every last word Jay has thrown up.

You're right, frankness and rudeness are not the same thing. That's why I used the word ignorant instead of stupid. It would have been rude to call someone stupid, where it is acceptable to call someone ignorant when they seem to lack understanding or facts.

What is rude is saying that I hate God and my neighbors simply because you disagree with my way of life. Not only is it rude, it's a lie, and that's where I call out the moral responsibility of honesty. I won't hold my breath waiting for any of you to agree with me on this. It suffices for me to know others see what you are doing and can see my points.

Larry Cirignano was never slandered by me on my blog, the word you're looking for is libel albeit as wrong in fact. You know full well that I reported the facts and cited the sources as they came in. If you can find a mistruth in one of my articles, email it to me for review and if you are correct I'll offer a retraction. The only reason Larry was found innocent is because the jury was worried he'd see jail time, and that fact and source is also cited. I have a right to my opinions, and I think he should have been found guilty.

Paul is a bigot by definition:

Main Entry: big·ot Pronunciation: \ˈbi-gət\ Function: noun Etymology: French, hypocrite, bigot Date: 1660 : a person obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices; especially : one who regards or treats the members of a group (as a racial or ethnic group) with hatred and intolerance.

It is the appropriate word to use; sorry if the shoe fits. Again, we are all responsible for our own actions, and if those actions are bigotted and someone calls you a bigot that is your fault and cannot be dismissed as insult.

The "slander" you claim I create of Jay again simply amounts to me calling him accountable for his actions. So long as he wants to write hurtful articles against GLBT people and he wants to flaunt his support of a hate group, he will be accountable for that.

By the way, thank you for continuing to call me adolescent. It truly underscores my point about how unaccountable you and others are hear for your insults and bad will toward GLBT people.

I will continue to forgive you as I would ask to be forgiven, and I will pray that you abandon your hate and look within for His light. Love conquers all.

"He becomes guilty of calumny who, by remarks contrary to the truth, harms the reputation of others and gives occasion for false judgments concerning them." (Catechism of the Catholic Church, 2477).

"Detraction and calumny destroy the reputation and honor of one's own neighbor. Honor is the social witness given to human dignity, and everyone enjoys a natural right to the honor of his name and reputation and to respect. Thus, detraction and calumny offend against the virtues justice and charity." (Catechism of the Catholic Church, 2479).

"When it is made publicly, a statement contrary to the truth takes on a particular gravity.." (Catechism of the Catholic Church, 2476).

John, you have now slandered three good Catholics: Jay G, Paul Melanson, and Larry Cirignano. None of these three have said or done anything to denigrate your person or homosexual persons in general. Both Paul and Jay have defended you at this Blog. But you have returned their kindness with hatred and violence. You have issued false statements designed to harm their reputation and honor.

John, you cannot accept people who disagree with you, you are obstinately devoted to your own opinions and prejudices; especially in regards those who defend Traditional marriage, and you do so with a hatred and intolerance that borders on intimidation while feigning dialog and rapproachment. You tried and found Larry Cirigano guilty on your web site, and mine, then you challenged me to testify under oath, and now you misrepresent that jurors in a misdermeanor Assault and Battery case were afraid Cirigano would get jail time, but how can this be - Det. Sullivan told me, as he must have told you, that while misdemeanor Assault and Battery has a very low standard of guilt "an unwanted touch", and is therefore very easy to prove in court (except when Rev. Payson testifies and the video shows he was not where he said he was) it is also very simply punished "a $25 fine". Yet 6, yes count them all 6 jurors acquited Cirignano, even that whiney juror feigning gay-guilt on the bread and chocolate coffee pie blog.

...Since this question relates to the natural moral law, the arguments that follow are addressed not only to those who believe in Christ, but to all persons committed to promoting and defending the common good of society.

I. THE NATURE OF MARRIAGEAND ITS INALIENABLE CHARACTERISTICS

2. The Church's teaching on marriage and on the complementarity of the sexes reiterates a truth that is evident to right reason and recognized as such by all the major cultures of the world. Marriage is not just any relationship between human beings... No ideology can erase from the human spirit the certainty that marriage exists solely between a man and a woman, who by mutual personal gift, proper and exclusive to themselves, tend toward the communion of their persons. In this way, they mutually perfect each other

...Sacred Scripture condemns homosexual acts "as a serious depravity... (cf. Rom 1:24-27; 1 Cor 6:10; 1 Tim 1:10). This judgment of Scripture does not of course permit us to conclude that all those who suffer from this anomaly are personally responsible for it, but it does attest to the fact that homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered". This same moral judgment is found in many Christian writers of the first centuries.

John Hosty tells us that "love conquers all" even as he unleashes a torrent of slander, libel and truly ugly accusations.What a strange conception of love.

Paul Melanson a bigot? That particular accusation not only constitutes libel, but is all the more tragic since Paul has worked tirelessly to promote human rights and has spent a considerable amount of time opposing anti-Semitism.

It is very sad that John Hosty has resorted to a vicious campaign of lies and bullying. I hope that his comments will be left here for all time as a permanent record of his hatred and animus toward those who oppose homosexuality on moral grounds even while respecting the homosexual person.

His words not only indicate an extremely disturbed personality but desperation. Having lost the intellectual debate here at DTF, he has sought refuge in name calling and slander. The last refuge of the scoundrel.

In the end it will not matter how disgracefully you conduct your campaign of mistruths; I'll still forgive you.

It is more important to love you as you are, faults and all, and to spread peace and joy than it is to respond in like hatred to these words. This is God's calling, not mine; let His will be done.

In the mean time you might want to consider that God is powerful enough to ensure all things are to His desire. He doesn't need you to angrily police His people and judge what's right or wrong for Him. What He needs us to do is spread His love.

Well John, in the end if I have conducted myself disgracefully with mistruths - it will matter. God has given us free will, and respects us enough to allow us to exercise it, because God wants the one thing He cannot create - our love.

I'm curious Mr. Hosty. The owner of this Blog has proven your lies about Mr. Cirigano. And yet, you continue in your slander of this Catholic activist.

You have slandered Mr. Melanson, publically labelling him a bigot. Where is your evidence of bigotry on Mr. Melanson's part? here he only showed you kindness, you have twice - and in public - labelled him a "bigot."

Do you even understand what the Church has to say about slander and its gravity - especially when someone's reputation is attacked publically?

You have admitted that you "violate Catholic law." That is a very legalistic way to approach the Commandments and God's Law of Love. You approach the Commandments with a sort of legalism not unlike the Pharisees. We Catholics accept God's Commandments and do our best to fulfill them because we love God. We see His Commandments as something more than just "laws" or "rules and regulations." I guess that's what separates us from people like you. We love God and His Commandments and you do not. Which is why you disobey Him.

But since you admit that you "violate" Catholic teaching, by what right do you slander Mr. Melanson (and others) as a bigot for simply reminding you of Church teaching?

Micheal, purhaps you could answer the question I've put to several of the people blogging here. If you are so vehemently against GLBT people, why didn't you sign the petition? I find it a strange coincidence that all these people did not sign.

It's also rather strange that you have the same exact things to say as William, even making the same mistake about the difference between slander and libel. Again, libel is written form, slander is verbal. The proper word to describe what you are accusing is libel.

Bigot is a word used to describe someone who is intolerant of people who are different that themselves. Since there is no tolerance for GLBT here from any of you the word fits. I'm sorry if you find that truth inconvenient. Until you can tell me you find value in GLBT as they are rather than as you want them to be you will in fact be a bigot; that's not my opinion.

You can say I hate God just as you can say pigs fly, it makes neither true simply because it's been said. It is my love for God that brings me back to save those of you who are lost in your hatred of your neighbors.

There is no loss of grace to befriend a sinner, and in doing so we may bring the light of Christ to someone in need. To me that is you! ;)

You said:

"Do you even understand what the Church has to say about slander and its gravity - especially when someone's reputation is attacked publically?"

Yes, and that same sin committed against me is on your hands as well as others here. Love thy neighbor and put no stumbling block in his path. Elevate each other towards Christ by spreading love and peace.

You also said:

"We see His Commandments as something more than just "laws" or "rules and regulations."

If that's true why are we reaching back into Leviticus (clearly a book with laws that are abandoned) to find your righteous indignation when you could be living His word that calls for us to love thy neighbor as thy self.

Again I cite that saying I hate God is not only LIBEL, it is against God's Ten Commandments. You don't know me, to be boldy saying things like I hate God is bearing false witness against me. You can admit what you have done wrong and repent for it, or you can pretend you do not see your sin. You only answer to God, not me, I forgive you your trespasses.

I will continue to pray for all of you effected by hatred and fear of your neighbors who are different than you. Pray St. Theresa's Prayer with me and find peace within it's words:

May today there be peace within.

May you trust God that you are exactly where you are meant to be.

May you not forget the infinite possibilities that are born of faith.

May you use those gifts that you have received, and pass on the love that has been given to you.

May you be content knowing you are a child of God.

Let this presence settle into your bones, and allow your soul the freedom to sing, dance, praise and love. It is there for each and every one of you.

"It's also rather strange that you have the same exact things to say as William, even making the same mistake about the difference between slander and libel. Again, libel is written form, slander is verbal. The proper word to describe what you are accusing is libel."

There is no mistake. The words may be used interchangeably. Libel is slander in written form as you mentioned. But it is still slander.

Like the Pharisees before you, you strain at a gnat and swallow a camel. Your sodomite lifestyle (if unrepented of) will in all likelihood lead you to Hell.

Your hatred of Catholics and your virulent anti-Catholicism have been noted at this forum. As has your slander (or libel if you prefer the word).

John, you're hateful anti-Catholicism and your campaign of lies is most unfortunate. The fact that you are addicted to the lie is proven by the fact that you continue to come here to slander Catholics who oppose homosexuality even though you have said repeatedly that you would not come back to this forum.

It is Sacred Scripture which condemns you as a hater of God:

Romans 1:

18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness;

19 Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath showed it unto them.

20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:

21 Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.

22 Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,

23 And changed the glory of the incorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and four footed beasts, and creeping things.

24 Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonor their own bodies between themselves:

25 Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.

26 For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature:

27 And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompense of their error which was meet.

28 And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient;

John's credo is, "create your own reality according to what feels right for you."

Would John have a problem with man-boy sex? As Christians, we would and do because we believe in right and wrong. We believe in objective truth. But would John condone sex with children? He might object that he opposes such. But I wouldn't believe him. Since John rejects Biblical morality and has embraced relativism, his philosophy is "Do what feels right for you."

This sexual libertinism says, "Sex with children? Do what feels right for you." "Sex with animals? Do what feels right for you."

John will probably object that he doesn't advocate these things. But that too will really be a lie. There is no basis for his condemnation of sex with children or animals. Since he is rejecting God's Laws and any absolute truth as expressed in Natural Law, he cannot say that sex with children or animals is wrong. And so, his philosophy of relativism tacitly condones (and even promotes perhaps) sex with children or animals or anything else which "feels right."

John's philosophy: If it feels right, do it. And you can legitimize it by calling it "love."

In 1 Corinthians 6-9,there is a condemnation of homosexual offenders, not homosexuality.

And it takes very little effort to learn what Paul was talking about. ALL serious scholars know it.

For example, this is from the website of the American Conference of Catholic Bishops.

Not news, I learned it when I was in high school. Even the Catholic Church knows full well that their stance on homosexuality is not biblical, but merely traditional.

THIS is what the RCC says regarding 6:9.

3 [9] The Greek word translated as boy prostitutes may refer to catamites, i.e., boys or young men who were kept for purposes of prostitution, a practice not uncommon in the Greco-Roman world. In Greek mythology this was the function of Ganymede, the "cupbearer of the gods," whose Latin name was Catamitus. The term translated Sodomites refers to adult males who indulged in homosexual practices with such boys. See similar condemnations of such practices in Romans 1:26-27; 1 Tim 1:10.

The writings of the New Testament do not deal explicitly with the subject of homosexuality. There are references to it, but these are quite rare, all being limited to the Pauline Epistles. The most logical explanation for this fact lies not in a permissive attitude towards the matter, but in the fact that homosexuality had already been condemned by Jewish tradition, to which all the early Christian writers are basically indebted, and that similarly in the Greek world it was censured by the predominant Stoic philosophy as contrary to nature. Thus, in the context of the first century, Philo of Alexandria, who is the leading exponent of Hellenistic Judaism, in his treatises repeatedly criticizes sodomy and pederasty as "illicit relations" (On Abraham 135) and those that practice them as "enemies of nature" (Special Laws 3:36); in the same way the Stoic philosopher Musonius Rufus defines homosexuality as "against nature" (Diatribe 12), while the Roman historian Tacitus speaks openly of the "degeneration of youth" with reference to its practice during the time of Nero (Annals 14, 20, 4). The New Testament therefore did not have any particular battle to fight on this front, needing only to align itself with the positions current in the cultural world of the first century. What was new, if anything, as invariably happens in an ethical discussion, were the reasons given for urging its avoidance.

Jesus never speaks of homosexuality. A bare mention can perhaps be seen when, in referring to John the Baptist, he says to the crowd: "What did you go out into the wilderness to behold? ... a man clothed in soft raiment? ... those who wear soft raiment are in kings' houses" (Mt 11:7, 8; Lk 7:25). The Greek word malakos, translated as "soft, tender", could also mean "effeminate". But in this case the allusion could only be very indirect, since the word is used about clothing and not people. The only real pronouncement Jesus made on human sexuality concerns the union of male and female as the expression of the order created by God (with an explicit quotation from Genesis 1:27 and 2:24) in a discussion on marriage: "Have you not read that he who made them from the beginning made them male and female ... and the two shall become one?" (Mt 19:4-5; Mk 10:6-7).

Forgery of the century

A separate discussion should perhaps be devoted to Jesus' relationship with the "disciple whom he loved", attested however only by the Fourth Gospel (cf. Jn 13:23). Actually, the use of the Greek word agapan, which implies the idea of a disinterested, pure and dispassionate love (rather than the more explicit eran, storghein and even philein), alone says that the love mentioned here has absolutely nothing to do with a homosexual relationship. Indeed, there was much discussion in 1973 when Prof. Morton Smith of the University of Harvard published in America the fragment of the so-called "Secret Gospel of Mark" (scarcely 20 lines), interpreted by the American scholar in a homosexual sense. With regard to Jesus' raising of a young man from a tomb in Bethany, the text says: "The young man, looking at him, loved him.... Six days later ... in the evening the young man joined him wearing a cloth of linen over his naked body; that night he stayed with him, and Jesus taught him the mystery of the kingdom of God". But this text raises an amazing series of difficulties, as was again pointed out recently by Prof. Graham Stanton of London University (cf. Gospel Truth? New Light on Jesus and the Gospels, Harper Collins, London 1995). The first difficulty is that its sole attestation is in a manuscript dating to the 18th century (i.e., 200 years ago!), while all the manuscripts considered by textual criticism always antedate the invention of printing in the 15th century. The second is that nobody up to now has ever been able to see the original. The third is that the text, in addition to appearing as part of a letter of Clement of Alexandria (who died in 215), in which the learned Egyptian condemned some libertine Christian sects who used it to justify themselves, does not precisely describe a homosexual relationship but speaks merely of a meeting about the mystery of the kingdom. The fourth is that the text appears as a conflation of the Gospels of Mark and John, in which the raising of Lazarus from the tomb is mentioned only as something well-known. Finally, it is natural to agree with an impartial author such as the famous Jewish scholar Jacob Neusner of Brown University, Rhode Island, who in 1994 again called the whole case "the forgery of the century".

But, as we were saying, it is in Paul's Letters that-there are explicit references to homosexuality. There are three cases, and they are always treated with disapproval.

In the First Letter to the Corinthians, the Apostle, among other things, gives a list of vices to be avoided: "Do not be deceived: neither the immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals, nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor robbers will inherit the kingdom of God" (6:9-10). In a perspective that is only slightly different but quite similar we read in the First Letter to Timothy: "...understanding this, that the law is not laid down for the just but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and sinners, for the unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers, immoral persons, sodomites, kidnappers, liars, perjurers, and whatever else is contrary to sound doctrine" (1 Tm 1: 9-10). The Greek word in question, arsenokoitai, which the RSV translates differently each time (respectively "homosexuals" and "sodomites"), is in fact a neologism that literally means "males who sleep together". It derives from the phraseology of the biblical Greek of the Septuagint where the Levitical text 20:13 is translated: "If a man lies with a male as with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination; they shall be put to death, their blood is upon them". The linguistic and thematic reference to this passage, where no exceptions are allowed, makes it impossible to interpret the Pauline statement in the restricted sense of only male prostitution, or more specifically, of pederasty, as some would like. On the other hand, it should be noted that the extreme severity of the punishment envisaged by the Levitical legislation is not repeated by Paul, who has the greatest respect for life. He however reacts to homosexuality by pointing out its eschatological exclusion from the kingdom of God, precisely because the practice does not conform to the divine law, just like all the other infractions that he lists by way of example. A certain relativity of the Pauline assertion can be deduced from the fact that the Apostle's main intention in these passages is certainly not to impart a specific teaching on homosexuality, which would in any case be very indirect; it is however unquestionably listed in a catalogue of actions judged reprehensible. Nevertheless, it should be noted that, like the biblical passage previously quoted, he only considers male, not female, homosexuality. But, indeed, here he expresses himself in the manner of biblical tradition, as can be seen from the explicit reference to the law in the Letter to Timothy. In other places the casuistry is more complete.

Idolatry as a religious aberration

In fact, in the Letter to the Romans, with regard to the moral perversion of the pagans Paul writes: "God gave them up to dishonourable passions. Their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural, and the men likewise gave up natural relations with women and were consumed with passion for one another, men committing shameless acts with men and receiving in their own persons the due penalty for their error" (Rom 1:26-27). This is one of the very rare texts in ancient times in which male homosexuality and female homosexuality are condemned together as practices against nature: two other cases can be found in Plato (Laws I, 636c) and in a Jewish-Hellenistic poetic composition of the first century attributed to a Pseudo-Phocilides (Sentences 191-192). But the Pauline passage has a certain originality, because of its context. The Apostle is in fact discussing the moral disorder resulting from the lack of knowledge of God in the pagan world, so that homosexuality together with a series of other vices (cf. Rom 1:29: "all manner of wickedness") is seen as the consequence of man's fatal "exchange" of the Creator with his creatures.

Some authors have tried to minimize the radical importance of this condemnation, claiming that Paul is thinking either of a depravation connected with idolatry, or of homosexuality that is contrary to the proper nature of heterosexuals, or again thinking that the expression "unnatural" is equivalent to "against the common patterns of social convention" or, lastly, that is not a true sin but merely one of the less pleasant aspects of pagan society. Interpretations of this kind are basically artificial, because they lose sight of the fact that the Apostle bases his argument on a view that is not cultural but rooted in creation; in fact the theme of the whole section of Romans 1:18-32 consists in the succession and mutual integration of three closely connected arguments: (1) the real possibility of a natural knowledge of God by all men (2) in fact clashes with the human perversion of idolatry that tragically reverses the roles of creature and Creator, and (3) therefore God consigns and almost abandons men to every sort of wickedness which inevitably follows. It may be interesting to observe that the penalty foreseen by Paul in these cases, in our text of the Letter to the Romans, is not the Jewish-eschatological type (as in the previous passage from the First Letter to the Corinthians), but the Stoic-immanent type. He in fact adopts here the classic ethical principle of Stoic philosophy that, if virtue rewards itself, vice is likewise its own punishment. Well, we can say that homosexuality is thus considered from the standpoint of self-corruption, so that it is at the same time the sign and consequence of a subversion of God's created order. However we should not exaggerate Paul's stand in the matter. In fact it is important to realize that the real criticism he develops in this context does not directly concern homosexuality, but rather idolatry as a religious aberration: it is this that he sees as the pagans' real problem, and homosexuality is only one indication together with many others.

Cross offers every sinner hope of Redemption

At the source of all these biblical and non-biblical passages, we must remember that in antiquity the discussion of homosexuality always considers the phenomenon either as a moral choice, and thus its practice is condemned, or as a conventional choice, and as such can be accepted, as happens in some cases (especially in classic Hellenism because of its presumed pedagogical values, as H. I. Marrou, for example shows in his Storia dell'educazione nell'antichita, Ed. Studium, Rome 1978, pp. 53-64). Absent however were the hereditary, physiological and psychological connotations that today are appropriately used for better judging the phenomenon.

Apart from this observation, there remains the fact, as Professor D. F. Wright of Edinburgh University, who has dedicated some specific publications to the matter, notes, that whatever may be said about individual tendencies and attitudes, Paul could only have considered all erotic homosexual behaviour as contrary to the Creator's plan for human life, and so to be abandoned at the moment of conversion (cf. "Homosexuality", in Dictionary on Paul and His Letters, edited by G.F. Hawthorne and R. P. Martin, InterVarsity Press, Downers Grove-Leicester 1993, p. 414). It is certain that nobody could honestly refer to the texts of the New Testament to justify a sexual practice which is constantly considered as deviating from God's created order.

But finally it should be stated clearly that St. Paul, when he speaks of it more fully, as occurs in the passage from the Letter to the Romans, subordinates this matter to the more general and decisive theme of man's universal sinfulness and of the merciful answer that God gives it in the Gospel. In fact, on the one hand the objective and, in a certain sense, inevitable situation of sin, in which all humanity outside Christ finds itself, leads to attitudes of wisdom and magnanimity that shrink from moralistic fanaticism. On the other, the revelation of God's saving justice in the Cross of Christ offers every sinner not only the hope but the certainty of a redemption that affects the whole person of the believer. Professor M. L. Soards of the Presbyterian Theological Seminary of Louisville rightly notes in a very recent publication that we should never pronounce disagreement or disapproval regarding homosexuality, without giving voice to and expressing God's word of grace in Jesus Christ which is even stronger (cf. Scripture and Homosexuality: Biblical Authority and the Church Today, Westminster, John Knox Press, Louisville, Kentucky, 1995, p. 75).

The Bible clearly teaches that homosexual practices are wrong, says an exegete from the John Paul II Institute in Rome.

Father Jean-Baptiste Edart, is co-author of "Clarifications sur l'Homosexualité dans la Bible" (Clarifications on Homosexuality in the Bible), published by Editions du Cerf.

ZENIT interviewed the authors in February. In this follow-up interview, Father Edart of the Emmanuel Community, discusses more in-depth the biblical teachings on homosexuality.

Part 2 of this interview will appear Friday.

Q: What are the references to homosexuality in the Bible?

Father Edart: This subject is given very little coverage in the Bible. This is linked to the absence of the visibility of this phenomenon, and that is a logical consequence of the prohibition of this behavior.

The biblical texts which address the question of homosexuality directly or indirectly are:

In the Old Testament

Genesis 19:7-8: "I beg you, my brothers, not to do this wicked thing. I have two daughters who have never had intercourse with men. Let me bring them out to you, and you may do to them as you please. But don't do anything to these men."

Judges 19:23-24: "No, my brothers; do not be so wicked. Since this man is my guest, do not commit this crime. Rather let me bring out my maiden daughter or his concubine. Ravish them, or do whatever you want with them; but against the man you must not commit this wanton crime."

Leviticus 18:22: "You shall not lie with a male as with a woman; such a thing is an abomination."

In the New Testament

1 Corinthians 6:9: "Do you not know that the unjust will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators nor idolaters nor adulterers nor homosexuals nor sodomites ... will inherit the kingdom of God."

1 Timothy 1:10: "... law is meant not for a righteous person but for the lawless and unruly ... the unchaste, practicing homosexuals, kidnapers, liars, perjurers, and whatever else is opposed to sound teaching."

Romans 1:26-27: "Therefore, God handed them over to degrading passions. Their females exchanged natural relations for unnatural, and the males likewise gave up natural relations with females and burned with lust for one another. Males did shameful things with males and thus received in their own persons the due penalty for their perversity."

Q: You quoted 1 Corinthians 6:9 and 1 Timothy 1:10. How should these texts be understood?

Father Edart: These two texts contain a list of vices presented as unacceptable for access to the kingdom of God.

In 1 Corinthians, two Greek words make reference to homosexuality: "malakos," translated here as "homosexuals," and "arsenokoites," translated as "sodomites."

These terms are very rare: "Malakos" appears only here in St. Paul, as for "arsenokoites," it is the first recurrence in the whole of Greek literature.

"Malakos" means, literally, "gentle, silky, delicate." In a homosexual relationship, it designates the passive partner, but it can also refer to homosexual prostitutes or very effeminate men.

The study of the meaning of "arsenokoites," and the clearly sexual context of the list of prohibitions invalidate these last two marginal interpretations.

"Arsenokoites" means literally "to lie with a man." Formed by the association of two words present in Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13, it quite probably appeared in the Judeo-Hellenistic context. Rabbis used the Hebrew expression "lie with a man," taken from the Hebrew text of Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13, to express the homosexual relationship.

They did not limit it to pederasty. All these elements seem sufficient to us to affirm that the most plausible theory is that this term refers to men having the active role in relations of a homosexual nature. The meaning of "arsenokoites" allows one to limit the meaning of "malakos" to the passive partner in a homosexual relationship.

Homosexual acts, therefore, are considered extremely grave, directly offending the divine Law. This teaching is perfectly consistent with Judaism of that time.

No distinction is related to a question of sexual orientation, or of circumstances of the act, nor is it indicated. It is the act itself which is condemned.

Q: And Romans 1:18-32?

Father Edart: St. Paul presents acts of a homosexual nature in men as well as women as a consequence of God's wrath. Research was substantiated around the precise nature of this homosexuality and of the interpretation which that passage should be given.

The Apostle wished to illustrate the nature of the ungodliness. He used homosexuality for that, vice characteristic of pagans in the Jewish tradition.

Based on the creation account in Genesis 1 and in Deuteronomy 4, he established the link between homosexuality and idolatry. In idolatry, man is dominated by the creature he adores, thus not rendering that corresponds only to the Creator.

What takes place is an inversion of the initial, manifested divine plan, among other things, in the sexual difference. In the act of a homosexual nature, this differentiation is not taken into consideration. This is why it constitutes for Paul the best illustration possible of ungodliness.

Another difficulty of interpretation of this text is the meaning of "against nature." In Roman culture, the adjective "natural" characterized acts in accord with social conventions.

Thus in Greco-Roman culture, beyond the feminine-masculine structure — masculine is the dominant relationship — it governed who established the moral norm in a loving relationship.

The allusion to Genesis 1 in Romans 1:19-23 invites us to see in "nature" the order willed by God and identifiable in creation. That is translated, among other things, by the man-woman sexual difference, fundamental structure willed by God as expression of his being of communion.

God willed the sexual union of man and woman, and this divine will, or divine Law, inscribed in nature is perceptible by reason. Man can observe this through all the elements that characterize sexual identity, genitalia being one of these signs.

If we wish to take into consideration the Roman meaning of this term, we could say that the act against nature does not respect the social convention established by God in creation.

The reference to Genesis 1 allows one to understand that this prohibition in no way is invalidated by questions of "tendencies" or orientation. It is every homosexual act in its materiality which is contrary to the divine will manifested in the beginning, whether imposed or consented.

Attention to the literal sense of the New Testament texts shows clearly therefore that homosexual acts are considered as gravely contrary to the divine Law. It is important to understand that this negative moral qualification is the logical consequence of a more positive side.

God willed to create man to be in alliance with him. This was manifested in the beginning in the sexual difference. The communion between man and woman is the first revelation of the love of God for man.

The difference allows for the expression of a complementarity, thus making possible the gift of persons. The sexed body manifests this. The teaching of the Church is in perfect continuity with what Scripture says on this subject.

CCC 2357: "Homosexuality refers to relations between men or between women who experience an exclusive or predominant sexual attraction toward persons of the same sex. It has taken a great variety of forms through the centuries and in different cultures. Its psychological genesis remains largely unexplained. Basing itself on Sacred Scripture, which presents homosexual acts as acts of grave depravity, tradition has always declared that "homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered." They are contrary to the natural law. They close the sexual act to the gift of life. They do not proceed from a genuine affective and sexual complementarity. Under no circumstances can they be approved."

Some say that they cannot be friendly to a sinner like me. It would be akin to encouraging my sins somehow.

I say we are all sinners. I love you in spite of your sins and even your hatred of me.

I'm told the sin of homosexuality is too big to be forgiven unless I repent and forgoe my ways.

I say that God me me who I am for a reason. I believe that reason was to reach out to people and show them this way of thinking is wrong. God wants us to love each other unconditionally.

Let me remind people of over a year ago when I was told to repent for my sins, so I did. I abstained from all acts and went to confession. The disposition of those here did not change. This shows me this is not about God's will, it is about your own revulsion of those with whom you disagree.

"John" writes, "I can point you to other theologians who have different views."

I have no doubt. There are dissident theologians who pontificate on a wide variety of issues and who are not in conformity with the mind of Christ.

But Holy Mother Church has spoken, Christ has spoken:CCC 2357: "Homosexuality refers to relations between men or between women who experience an exclusive or predominant sexual attraction toward persons of the same sex. It has taken a great variety of forms through the centuries and in different cultures. Its psychological genesis remains largely unexplained. Basing itself on Sacred Scripture, which presents homosexual acts as acts of grave depravity, tradition has always declared that "homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered." They are contrary to the natural law. They close the sexual act to the gift of life. They do not proceed from a genuine affective and sexual complementarity. Under no circumstances can they be approved."

Under no circumstances. That's pretty clear. The issue is closed. Christ has spoken through His Church.

Saint Peter Damian (Doctor of the Church) was clear on sodomy. According to Damian, the vice of sodomy "surpasses the enormity of all others," because:

"Without fail, it brings death to the body and destruction to the soul. It pollutes the flesh, extinguishes the light of the mind, expels the Holy Spirit from the temple of the human heart, and gives entrance to the devil, the stimulator of lust. It leads to error, totally removes truth from the deluded mind ... It opens up hell and closes the gates of paradise ... It is this vice that violates temperance, slays modesty, strangles chastity, and slaughters virginity ... It defiles all things, sullies all things, pollutes all things ...

"This vice excludes a man from the assembled choir of the Church ... it separates the soul from God to associate it with demons. This utterly diseased queen of Sodom renders him who obeys the laws of her tyranny infamous to men and odious to GodÖ She strips her knights of the armor of virtue, exposing them to be pierced by the spears of every vice ... She humiliates her slave in the church and condemns him in court; she defiles him in secret and dishonors him in public; she gnaws at his conscience like a worm and consumes his flesh like fire. ... this unfortunate man (he) is deprived of all moral sense, his memory fails, and the mind's vision is darkened. Unmindful of God, he also forgets his own identity. This disease erodes the foundation of faith, saps the vitality of hope, dissolves the bond of love. It makes way with justice, demolishes fortitude, removes temperance, and blunts the edge of prudence. (emphasis added)

"Shall I say more?"

Peter Damian is more than just a theologian. He is a Doctor of the Church. Cite me just one Doctor of the Church who condones sodomy...

Who speaks for the Church founded by Christ? The Magisterium. And she has spoken on homosexuality:

CCC 2357: "Homosexuality refers to relations between men or between women who experience an exclusive or predominant sexual attraction toward persons of the same sex. It has taken a great variety of forms through the centuries and in different cultures. Its psychological genesis remains largely unexplained. Basing itself on Sacred Scripture, which presents homosexual acts as acts of grave depravity, tradition has always declared that "homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered." They are contrary to the natural law. They close the sexual act to the gift of life. They do not proceed from a genuine affective and sexual complementarity. Under no circumstances can they be approved."

I'm still waiting for you to cite one Church Doctor (or Father) who condones homosexuality.

Can you cite one document of the Church's Magisterium which approves of homosexuality? Come on John, don't just ask questions. Answer a few.

You've lost John. The Church has spoken. There are no Church documents on your side. There are no Church Doctors on your side. There are no Church Fathers on your side. There are no Church Councils on your side.

John H-G,You are legally married (in Massachusetts) to another man, marriage is public, you did it, when we speak about it and its implications it is not slander, not calumny, and not even detraction.

You can’t claim someone does not love their brethren when you don’t understand what love is.

John,Your entire claim that homosexual acts are not condemned hangs on one word in your quoted definition, ‘may’, as in “The Greek word translated as boy prostitutes may refer to catamites” and sinks when one reads the translation of the last word in 1st Cor6:9, the Greek word arsenokoites, translated as sodomite, with a Greek definition of “from arrhn - arrhen and koith - koite a sodomite:--abuser of (that defile) self with mankind”And what do the same US Bishops say about Rom1:24, where homosexuality is clearly and unambiguously labeled sin. “In order to expose the depth of humanity's rebellion against the Creator, God handed them over to impurity through the lusts of their hearts. Instead of curbing people's evil interests, God abandoned them to self-indulgence, thereby removing the facade of apparent conformity to the divine will. Subsequently Paul will show that the Mosaic law produces the same effect; cf Romans 5:20; 7:13-24. The divine judgment expressed here is related to the theme of hardness of heart described in Romans 9:17-18.”The constant twisting and mangling of Scripture to defend sin is growing very tiresome. You’re defending the indefensible, which is why so much of what you say is confusion wrapped in anger.

I'm curious as to what I see here. On one hand we have people like William who feel the need to villify me by making wild and irresponsible charges like I hate God. This is not exactly a stellar endorsement of your side of this issue or the behavior Christ would model.

On the other hand we have John who is also a devout Christian who sees a place at God's table for all those who believe.

Why is it wrong for John to be my friend? How does it harm Christ or his stance with Him?

The answer is self evident; it does no harm to be kind to anyone, even those with whome you disagree.

No matter how often people deflect my points that you are accountable for your behavior it does not absolve you with Him.

I will continue to pray for you to understand peace and move away from your personal attacks. Hate is not His way, nor is it a social value.

Simply saying something does not make it true William. I do not hate God, nor do I hate my neighbor, or even you who constantly defames me with lies. Nor does evading or denying your hatred for me make it less true. You really should stop; I'm embarassed for you since you lack the sense to be embarassed yourself. I also forgive you and love you anyway as God asks.

I will continue to treat you with the respect and dignity I ask for and I have faith that God will put things in order one way or another.

The First Degree of HarmThe first degree of harm from this [inordinate] joy [in temporal things that are less than God] is backsliding: a blunting of the mind in relation to God by which God's goods become dark to it, just as a cloud darkens the air and prevents the sun from illuminating it.

"By the very fact that Spiritual persons rejoice in something and give reign to the appetite in frivolous things, their relationship with God is darkened and their intellect clouded... Even though the intellect is without the thought of any malice, joy in these vanities and concupiscence for them is alone sufficient to produce the first degree of this harm: dullness of mind and darkness of Judgement in understanding Truth and judging welll of each thing as it is in itself"

John Hosty wrote, "Faith, love, and charity are my guiding focuses." And yet, as Jay has documented so well, John regularly insults and slanders those who disagree with him about homosexuality.

Jay, responding to your query as to where you have been hateful and argumentative, posted this response:

Threats, insults, slander, presumptuous blather – "Your public support of hatred has been noted.""you[r] attempt to push that opinion as fact shows your ignorance.""So much for the moral responsibility of honesty""You cannot wipe your sins away as easily as saying ‘well, they did it too’,""Sorry [Ellen], but I'll reserve the right to think you are just another face of Jay until you are proven otherwise…I'll pray that you are able to see the error of hating those you don't know based on presumptions.""I'm just not very proud of the way you're conducting you[r]self at the moment. In your passion to put me in my place you have fallen far from His will.""Your denial of Christ's powerful message of love is a mistruth in and of itself""Do not disgrace yourself by speaking poorly of a person whom you've never met""you simply chose your revulsion over God's calling. I'll pray for your strength that you overcome this fault and learn how to love as Christ commands""This website is affiliated with the hate of MassResistance.com, which promotes lies against GLBT people. Do you think that God would approve of lies being used to attack what you think His enemies to be?""It is said that no one is worthy through their actions, not even you Jay""I 'eat' from faith because I know in my heart Christ does not condemn my actions, only His misguided followers do.""My coming here and suffering the ourageous slings and arrows that are thrown at me is in and of itself an act of contrition, humility, and compassion."

"This [Liviticus18] is where most lesbians smile and show that they were not mentioned.""During the unfair persecution of Job he was tormented by 'mockers' which I see a lot of you to be"

Scripture-baiting: "Jay, you might want to get tutored in scripture if you really think Romans 14 is about diet." Except John forgot to mention he left off the following 'diet' verses when he quoted Rm14 "For one believeth that he may eat all things: but he that is weak, let him eat herbs. Let not him that eateth despise him that eateth not…And he that eateth eateth to the Lord…For if, because of thy meat[food], thy brother be grieved, thou walkest not now according to charity. Destroy not him with thy meat[food], for whom Christ died."14:2-3,7,15 So you mischaracterized my point as being only about "diet" when in fact I said "Romans 14 is about Jewish dietary laws and how or if they should apply to christians, and about the possibility of eating with Gentiles who were pagans who may have sacrificed their animals to a false god, and whether or not eating at their banquets would cause scandal" in order to take a cheap shot a our Scriptural exegesis.

These were YOUR comments John. They represent examples of your hatred and anger. They indicate a lack of peace on your part. But then, not living the Christ life, you are unable to achieve inner peace.

For the umpteenth time John, it is Sacred Scripture which declares your hatred of Jesus. According to these Scriptures, you stand SELF-CONDEMNED. Romans 1:30 declares that those who engage in homosexual acts do so because THEY HATE GOD. I didn't write the Scripture John. The Holy Spirit is the Author using men to transcribe His inspired Word. So I cannot take the credit - or your blame - for this Revealed Truth.

In today's reading at Holy Mass, we hear Jesus say, If you love Me, keep My Commandments." He tells us that if we do obey (or keep) His Commandments, He will send us the Holy Spirit.

Recall how Jesus tells us that not everyone who says "Lord, Lord," will enter the Kingdom of Heaven. BUT ONLY THOSE WHO DO THE WILL OF HIS FATHER IN HEAVEN.

To those who refuse to do His Father's Will, He will say, "Depart from Me, I do not know you."

This is God's Word on the subject John. Until you repent of your homosexual lifestyle, you stand self-condemned by the Holy Word which you reject. And your rejection of this Holy Word is rooted in hatred of God (Romans 1:30).

William, these things I have said are not insults, they are truths. Pick one which you would like me to clearer on and we can have a conversation about it if you like. I don't want readers to be unnecessarily burdened with a "paper blizzard" when they can have clarification.

I stand as condemned by my sins as you do, like all of us. In the lack of Jesus' presence in the flesh we are forced to turn to what He has left for us to guide us. One of those things is His word as written by others supposedly by His will.

One of the troubles with being a Bible literalist is that not only are there over 5,000 versions of the Bible, the Church has existed since before the Gospel was written.

The other gift Jesus brought was His love that dwells within our hearts. It is by His will that we find love for our neighbors, we put aside our human urge to judge one another, and we see others as worth our time.

Cast every stone you wish, paint me as the villian you want, it is His will that is more important than my human pride. He says that I should not let these things deter me from loving you and being patient with you.

I invite you onto the same path of peace through Him. Along this path we can concentrate on what we CAN do together and not on what keeps us apart. Great things are accomplished when we find the time to listen to His commands and follow our hearts.

John, you have no peace. This is made clear by your angry, hateful and argumentative comments as well as the calumny you have engaged in.

Romans 1:30 is very clear. Those who embrace the sodomite lifestyle do so because they hate God. Jesus said, "If you love Me, keep My Commandments." (John 14:15). The reason you do not keep His Commandments is that you hate Him.

Read and meditate on the Gospel of John, Chapters 14 and 15. We can only say that we love God if we keep His Commandments.

You continually mention that we are all sinners. Amen to that. What you so conveniently omit, however, is that not all sins are mortal and lead to Hell. Venial sins are forgiven at Holy Mass. Mortal sins are not.

Objectively speaking, every homosexual act constitutes a mortal sin. God alone knows your culpability. But just as we cannot say definitively that John Hosty is going to Hell (a judgment I wouldn't care to make since there is only one God who judges in this sense and I'm not Him), so too you cannot absolve yourself of guilt.

Objectively speaking, your homosexual acts are mortally sinful. I would strongly advise you to make a good sacramental confession.

Until you are once again at peace with God, you will never have peace with others. I've seen evidence of this at other websites such as Mass Conservative Christian, where you were arguing and fighting with others about (big surprise) homosexuality.

John, you will never find peace as long as you embrace hatred of Jesus and neighbor. I urge you again to make a good sacramental confession. Until you return to a life of prayer and himility, and conform yourself to Jesus, you will continue to live a life of hatred and discord.

I am filled with love and appreciation for life after having survived cancer. God's love for me washes away all of you hate for me and replaces it with strength.

With that new found strength I intend to continue to show you that peace is a better way. Angry words do no one a service.

Stop and think about this logically for a moment. There is nothing I need or want from you or anyone else here. What would be my motivation to continue here if I had nothing to gain? The answer is simple, I answer a higher calling that wishes us to live together in peace.

Say what you will William, but my actions speak for themselves in stark contrast to your accusations. Though I may be disappointed at your lack of effort to be a good neighbor and Samaritan, I will not hold that against you or judge you for it.

Mr. Hosty, the hateful and argumentative comments which you made and which were cited by JayG say it all. I agree with William and the other Catholics who post here. Your hateful accusations, your calumny against Catholic writers and activists such as Larry Cirigano, Paul Melanson and JayG (I don't know his full name) are indicative of one whose personal life is imbued with a radical hatred of both God and neighbor.

Your actions do indeed speak for themselves. And they are a legacy of shame. As long as this discussion thread is maintained, there will be a record of your anger, hatred, calumny and lack of peace.

I am praying for you to renounce your sodomite "lifestyle" and your life of hatred and lying.

You should ask youself why you choose to continue to deliberately misrepresent the truth. Does God need liars standing up for Him? Clearly He does not.

Yet time and time again on this website I am accused of being hate filled. When I ask how you arrive at this you point to the Bible and say that because I am gay this must be true.

I don't think for one second that you actually believe this because if you did you would listen to reason. You would hear me when I say I love God and you, and you would relent on at least that issue. That is not the case here. It seems you are using this point to try to confuse the truth, which amounts to lying.

We can disagree about elements in the Bible and still be good people. Do you have any friends that are Muslim? Do they hate God and man simply because they do not follow the Word you know? Of course not.

May God forgive you as you forgive others; herein lies your redemption or doom. I forgive you your trespasses against me and I will continue to do so no matter how offensive you become, for it is His will and not mine that will be done.

I pray for peace with you and for you, as well as for all the rest here and elsewhere whom it escapes. As for me, I have found peace in Him and wish to share it as He commands.

John, you have left a multitude of comments here at DTF which are laced with hate, calumny and sarcasm. If people are now taking you to task for your hatred and lies, you only have yourself to blame.

Since you cannot get along with others (not only at this forum but apparently others as well), perhaps it's time to make a good examination of conscience?

I would advise obtaining a spiritual advisor who is faithful to Church teaching and who is experienced in spiritual matters. Be warned, however, that you may not like what he tells you.

Consider this fact John....so many others have noticed - and commented on - your hateful posts, your lies about those you disagree with and your lack of peace that the Lord Jesus would appear to be telling you something.

You have argued at - and insulted others at - other websites and Blogs. Does this suggest anything to you at all? Is the whole world against you John? Or could it be....could it just be...that YOU have some serious problems and issues you need to resolve?

I don't expect you to agree with me John. I only ask you to consider what I'm telling you. Because, from my vantage point, your level of hate and dishonesty is truly demonic.

The sin of bearing false witness against your neighbor is more powerful a sin than acting on being gay. I challenge you to say otherwise.

For this reason and others I reach out to people like you, and I am paid back by emails of love and support from all over the world. That love along with His love guides me to continue where most would lay down.

"You will know who comes in His name by the love they bring."

Where is the love here?

Good people can still be good and be wrong. I charge that there are good people doing wrong here for what they believe to be the right reasons. The trouble is that dishonesty is a serious thing. You cannot make unfounded charges against people and not expect to be called out for it.

Just because you continue to say something does not make it true. I do not hate God, nor anyone else like you who continually campaigns to make me out as "demonic" in your own words. I love you in spite of your failures and I welcome you into my life as you are.

God would not have made you this way if He did not have a reason. Although I do not understand that reason I do not have to. It is enough to know that I am meant to concentrate on loving others, i do not need to question why because I feel in my heart it is right.

I love you sister Ellen as a do brothers Jay, William, Cole et al. Together we may find more of Christ's true glory than we do as individuals who finger point.

Let people consider my continued patience and actions a testimony of His will, not my own. No one is strong enough to sirvive this attack without Him by their side.

"John Hosty wrote, "Faith, love, and charity are my guiding focuses." And yet, as Jay has documented so well, John regularly insults and slanders those who disagree with him about homosexuality.

Jay, responding to your query as to where you have been hateful and argumentative, posted this response:

Threats, insults, slander, presumptuous blather – "Your public support of hatred has been noted.""you[r] attempt to push that opinion as fact shows your ignorance.""So much for the moral responsibility of honesty""You cannot wipe your sins away as easily as saying ‘well, they did it too’,""Sorry [Ellen], but I'll reserve the right to think you are just another face of Jay until you are proven otherwise…I'll pray that you are able to see the error of hating those you don't know based on presumptions.""I'm just not very proud of the way you're conducting you[r]self at the moment. In your passion to put me in my place you have fallen far from His will.""Your denial of Christ's powerful message of love is a mistruth in and of itself""Do not disgrace yourself by speaking poorly of a person whom you've never met""you simply chose your revulsion over God's calling. I'll pray for your strength that you overcome this fault and learn how to love as Christ commands""This website is affiliated with the hate of MassResistance.com, which promotes lies against GLBT people. Do you think that God would approve of lies being used to attack what you think His enemies to be?""It is said that no one is worthy through their actions, not even you Jay""I 'eat' from faith because I know in my heart Christ does not condemn my actions, only His misguided followers do.""My coming here and suffering the ourageous slings and arrows that are thrown at me is in and of itself an act of contrition, humility, and compassion."

"This [Liviticus18] is where most lesbians smile and show that they were not mentioned.""During the unfair persecution of Job he was tormented by 'mockers' which I see a lot of you to be"

Scripture-baiting: "Jay, you might want to get tutored in scripture if you really think Romans 14 is about diet." Except John forgot to mention he left off the following 'diet' verses when he quoted Rm14 "For one believeth that he may eat all things: but he that is weak, let him eat herbs. Let not him that eateth despise him that eateth not…And he that eateth eateth to the Lord…For if, because of thy meat[food], thy brother be grieved, thou walkest not now according to charity. Destroy not him with thy meat[food], for whom Christ died."14:2-3,7,15 So you mischaracterized my point as being only about "diet" when in fact I said "Romans 14 is about Jewish dietary laws and how or if they should apply to christians, and about the possibility of eating with Gentiles who were pagans who may have sacrificed their animals to a false god, and whether or not eating at their banquets would cause scandal" in order to take a cheap shot a our Scriptural exegesis.

These were YOUR comments John. They represent examples of your hatred and anger. They indicate a lack of peace on your part. But then, not living the Christ life, you are unable to achieve inner peace.

For the umpteenth time John, it is Sacred Scripture which declares your hatred of Jesus. According to these Scriptures, you stand SELF-CONDEMNED. Romans 1:30 declares that those who engage in homosexual acts do so because THEY HATE GOD. I didn't write the Scripture John. The Holy Spirit is the Author using men to transcribe His inspired Word. So I cannot take the credit - or your blame - for this Revealed Truth.

In today's reading at Holy Mass, we hear Jesus say, If you love Me, keep My Commandments." He tells us that if we do obey (or keep) His Commandments, He will send us the Holy Spirit.

Recall how Jesus tells us that not everyone who says "Lord, Lord," will enter the Kingdom of Heaven. BUT ONLY THOSE WHO DO THE WILL OF HIS FATHER IN HEAVEN.

To those who refuse to do His Father's Will, He will say, "Depart from Me, I do not know you."

This is God's Word on the subject John. Until you repent of your homosexual lifestyle, you stand self-condemned by the Holy Word which you reject. And your rejection of this Holy Word is rooted in hatred of God (Romans 1:30)."

John, you need to repent of your hatred toward God and toward people who refuse to accept your sodomite "lifestyle." Your hatred is consuming you like a cancer. It is impeding your growth as a human being. It is alienating you from those you come in contact with.

Until you explain your hatefule and slanderous comments, no dialogue with you will be possible. Until you repent of your hatred and your violence, no dialogue with you will be possible.

William, I respond as I did the last time you posted this; it seems you are attempting to confuse people by posting everything but the kitchen sink.

I asked you to pick a particular post and I could clarify it. Since you don't seem to want to do that I'll pick for you:

I wrote: "MassResistance.com is now listed as a hate group. Your public support of hatred has been noted."

My comment was in reference to the link on DTF's front page, and that is a truth not a misrepresentation.

I expect most people will agree with me when I say that responsible people would take that link down once they realize it is a hate group. They would also agree that public support of a hate group acknowledges your own similar hate.

I think what you have been doing is trying to distract people from this truth, and trying to deflect blame.

Like it or not we are neighbors and brothers/sisters as God's children.

You can continue to quote things that Paul wrote, like 1 Corinthians 6:9 or Romans 1:30, but the man never even met Christ. He only saw Him in visions. Those who met Christ in the flesh and heard His words with their own ears had nothing to report of Him saying all these things against GLBT people.

Your only point against me is that I am gay. It's a crying shame you can't see a person past that point because that's all you see. That's the sin I hope to save you from my friend. There's a whole big world out there of diversity waiting for you to love and love you back.

I don't see being gay as a sin because I see all things having come from God and therefore are sacred.

I think if Christ were alive today He would ask us to put aside our differences and concentrate on peace, love, and joy. We can save each others souls and not step on each other's toes.

"Do not think that I have come to bring peace upon the earth. I have come to bring not peace but the sword..." (Jesus, Matthew 10:34).

An authentic peace is anchored in truth. It has its foundation in truth. This is why Jesus said that He didn't come to bring peace upon the earth. At least not as man understands "peace." His peace is authentic because it has its foundation in truth.

This is why you have no real peace John. You reject His truth. And because of this, you stand self-condemned.

This is a quote from John Hosty-grinnell's posting----"I think if Christ were alive today He would ask us to put aside our differences and concentrate on peace, love, and joy".

His thinking is an indication of a true lack of understanding the Catholic Faith.

The Catholic Church is Chirst with us today. He is living with us in His Church and in His Sacramental Life. He is speaking to us thru His Church and thru His Vicar, the Holy Father the Supreme and Chief Teacher of His Church.

Christ is saying the same thing as always, 1- "If you love Me, keep my commandments."

2-"If you accept My teaching, you are My disciple,and then you will know the truth and the truth will set you free.

3-Christ's teaching thru His Church is that acting out the homosexual life style is a serious sin.

4-Serious sin breaks union with Christ, Who is God. In doing this one ceases to love Chirst (God) and fails in observing His First Commandment.

These differences cannot be put aside, since in doing so, one will not possess the peace or love of Christ.

The Catholic Church's official position on homosexuality can be foundin the Catechism of the Catholic Church:

2358. The number of men and women who have deep-seated homosexualtendencies is not negligible. They do not choose their homosexualcondition; for most of them it is a trial. They must be accepted withrespect, compassion, and sensitivity. Every sign of unjustdiscrimination in their regard should be avoided. These persons arecalled to fulfill God's will in their lives and, if they areChristians, to unite to the sacrifice of the Lord's Cross thedifficulties they may encounter from their condition.

All I am saying to all of you here is that you could start the heaing process by talking to your gay neighbors with the same respect you want from others for yourself.

Even your own John Ansley has said:

"It is a "hate group". But not in the sense you mean. It hates sin and not people. Jesus commanded us to hate sin and love the sinner."

While I have seen plenty of hate for ths sin, where is the love for the sinner?" Perhaps you've taken it upon youself to decide that I am not worth saving?

It seems that some of you argue that you cannot be civil with ous while we continue to sin. Are we supposed to find Jesus on our own? Is so, why does Jesus ask you to reach out to those who sin and be the light to His way?

Tha facts speak clearly when you follow your heart. In the words of Abraham Lincoln:

"When I do good I feel good. When I do bad I feel Bad. That is my religion."

There really isn't too much more to it than that. If you are always being good and modeling Christ's behavior you will find His kingdom alive in your heart.

This fact I know and hope to share with you one day. The more joy you are able to share with others the closer you are to Him.

Love speaks the truth John. And the truth is that you stand self-condemned by your rejection of God's Holy Word and the Tradition which may only be interpreted by His Church's Magisterium. And this Tradition presents homosexual acts as "intrinsically disordered" and therefore [objectively speaking] gravely sinful.

Your notion of "love" is not one founded on truth. Your idea of "love" is for us to abandon our beliefs and to reject the teaching of Christ's Church while affirming you in your sin. This we cannot do.

Because our love is genuine [a love you know absolutely nothing about, sadly] we speak the truth to you. A truth you find offensive and don't wish to hear.

If our telling you the truth is so unpalatable for you, the solution is painfully simple: don't return to this Blog. Surely you would be "happier" amongst those who simply agree with everything you declare to be "truth" and who affirm you in your sin and dissent from Church teaching.

"Your notion of "love" is not one founded on truth. Your idea of "love" is for us to abandon our beliefs and to reject the teaching of Christ's Church while affirming you in your sin. This we cannot do."

What I expect is for you to UPHOLD Christ's teachings, which is to love one another as we do ourselves. This concept seems to work fine for my Catholic family and Chrisitan friends, why not you? They do not see it as a compromise to show love to any of God's children unconditionally.

To them it does not matter whether someone was a Muslim, Atheist, murderer, or just simply gay. They leave the judging part to God and they get on with the part they are called to do; love.

It is by the power of Christ we keep coming together and it by His will that all things happen. I am sure to learn something from you all here or else He would not keep me coming back. What the is I haven't a clue, but so long as I am called to be His light I will do my best.

Are you doing your best?

While I appreciate the fact that you are inviting me to leave William, this is not your blog. If Jay wants me to stop posting here he can ask me himself.

Personally I think the exchange is good for both sides to hear. It gives us something to think about outside of our own thoughts. I think both parties walk away from the exchange stronger for having spoken.

William, I went to the website provided and it led to another link in which I saw no proof that the GLBT community does not want honest debate. I saw it said, but again just because something is said does not make it true.

I also saw a long list of Christian web links and then one for Rush Limbaugh. Once I saw Rush I this article lost all credibility it would have had in my opinion.

So if the GLBT community is not interested in honest debate why would people like me come here where our opponents have all the control and talk directly to them?

It seems that some would like our conversation to end so they can go back to their propaganda that all gay people are evil inherently. I hope that people are begining to see that we are all individuals, just like anyone else, who deserve to be judged by our actions and not hearsay.

What is rather evident is that homosexual activists are not open to authentic dialogue and want to control every aspect of the debate. This because their arguments have no merit. The article cited proves that point abundantly.

John, you're engaging in dishonesty again. No one here ever condemned homosexual persons as "evil." It is the sin which we condemn. It is the "lifetsyle" which we condemn.

William is right. You are condemning yourself by rejecting Christ's teaching on homosexuality.

Last time I checked, calling someone demonic was akin to saying they are evil.

The only true dishonesty that has been shown on this blog is the attempt to discriminate via stereotyping, and saying all GLBT people fall under a certain verse in the Bible and are therefore haters and liars.

I will continue to pray for you to see past your fears and find the strength you need to come to terms with your Christian responsibilities to love those around you, even when they are not up to your opinion of what God wants.

"I will continue to pray for you to see past your fears and find the strength you need to come to terms with your Christian responsibilities to love those around you, even when they are not up to your opinion of what God wants."

- John Hosty

But who is living in fear and irrational hatred? As Jay noted, John has made repeated attacks against Christians who frequent this Blog and has engaged in slander as well:

Threats, insults, slander, presumptuous blather – "Your public support of hatred has been noted.""you[r] attempt to push that opinion as fact shows your ignorance.""So much for the moral responsibility of honesty""You cannot wipe your sins away as easily as saying ‘well, they did it too’,""Sorry [Ellen], but I'll reserve the right to think you are just another face of Jay until you are proven otherwise…I'll pray that you are able to see the error of hating those you don't know based on presumptions.""I'm just not very proud of the way you're conducting you[r]self at the moment. In your passion to put me in my place you have fallen far from His will.""Your denial of Christ's powerful message of love is a mistruth in and of itself""Do not disgrace yourself by speaking poorly of a person whom you've never met""you simply chose your revulsion over God's calling. I'll pray for your strength that you overcome this fault and learn how to love as Christ commands""This website is affiliated with the hate of MassResistance.com, which promotes lies against GLBT people. Do you think that God would approve of lies being used to attack what you think His enemies to be?""It is said that no one is worthy through their actions, not even you Jay""I 'eat' from faith because I know in my heart Christ does not condemn my actions, only His misguided followers do.""My coming here and suffering the ourageous slings and arrows that are thrown at me is in and of itself an act of contrition, humility, and compassion."

"This [Liviticus18] is where most lesbians smile and show that they were not mentioned.""During the unfair persecution of Job he was tormented by 'mockers' which I see a lot of you to be"

Scripture-baiting: "Jay, you might want to get tutored in scripture if you really think Romans 14 is about diet." Except John forgot to mention he left off the following 'diet' verses when he quoted Rm14 "For one believeth that he may eat all things: but he that is weak, let him eat herbs. Let not him that eateth despise him that eateth not…And he that eateth eateth to the Lord…For if, because of thy meat[food], thy brother be grieved, thou walkest not now according to charity. Destroy not him with thy meat[food], for whom Christ died."14:2-3,7,15 So you mischaracterized my point as being only about "diet" when in fact I said "Romans 14 is about Jewish dietary laws and how or if they should apply to christians, and about the possibility of eating with Gentiles who were pagans who may have sacrificed their animals to a false god, and whether or not eating at their banquets would cause scandal" in order to take a cheap shot at our Scriptural exegesis.

John has publically labelled Larry Cirigano, Paul Melanson and JayG "bigots." I submit that John Hosty needs to make a good sacramental confession and to make reparation for the detraction he has engaged in.

John H.,You condemned us as a hate group. Then when John Ansley posted that “Jesus commanded us to hate sin and love the sinner”, you twisted this into a challenge: “show me where Jesus preached hate”

This is typical of you, ½ the story, ½ the phrase, ½ truth. You say of yourself “My sins don't excuse your behavior”, but you do not think of what you do as a sin. This is why you refer to it as our “opinion of what God wants.” It is not simply our opinion, it is the Natural Law. Hard truths require changed lives.

Here is your opportunity to show the public you are not lying William. Were have I threatened anyone?

While you are at it perhaps you could also explain why Jay G., et al are NOT bigots? They certainly seem to fit the definition of the word to me, but maybe you have a different perspective.

Ellen, what would really be nice is for us to get past focusing on what I do in my bedroom and putting an effort towards what mutual good we can do together. I think you and others have beaten this dead horse long enough.

Yes people out there are gay, you're going to have to deal with it one way or another in life. What way you do this speaks volumes about your character and says mothing about mine.

I will continue to pray that you find peace through Him and love for your neighbors as He commands.

One of the keys to His kingdom is through humility, something you seem not to have while judging others so freely. For this reason some of the last shall be first and some of the first shall be last. Jesus spent time eating with sinners for a reason, have you ever tried to model this behavior?

Truly, not a creation has been made without Him present for it. Everything has a place in the Divine Plan; it would be arrogant to think we as humans could understand our Shepherd's will.

It suffices for me to follow His words of love and let Him be the judge at the end of days. I'm confident we will all find our way to Him on our own paths.

"Ellen, what would really be nice is for us to get past focusing on what I do in my bedroom and putting an effort towards what mutual good we can do together. I think you and others have beaten this dead horse long enough."

And yet, you were the one who came to this Blog to publically announce your sodomite way of life and to denounce those of us who are morally opposed to it.

If the horse is dead John, it is because you've killed it. You write, "One of the keys to His kingdom is through humility, something you seem not to have while judging others so freely." And yet, an authentic humility (as opposed to your fraudulent notion of the same) always embraces God's Commandments. This you refuse to do as you freely violate - even by your own admission - the teaching of Christ through His Church.

And then you tell us that you will, "..continue to pray that you find peace through Him and love for your neighbors as He commands."

But we aren't the ones lacking peace Mr. Hosty. You are. This is why you continually return to this Blog in a vain attempt to convince us (while really trying to convince yourself) that your sodomite lifestyle is somehow "okay." In other words, the time has come for you to stop beating your proverbial dead horse.

Since you cannot justify your sodomite activity from Divine Revelation and Natural Law, you stand, as William has so courageously put it, self-condemned.

John Hosty challenges me with the following comment: "Here is your opportunity to show the public you are not lying William. W[h]ere have I threatened anyone?"

When you posted the following comment: "Your public support of hatred has been noted," you were issuing a veiled threat.

But your acts of violence haven't been limited to veiled threats. For every instance where you have calumniated someone constitutes an act of violence.

Not all violence is physical John. When you bear false witness against your neighbors (and we are all neighbors John), you commit a terrible act of violence against them.

When you engaged in calumny against Larry Cirigano, you committed violence. When you calumniated Paul Melanson, you committed an act of violence. When you calumniated JayG, you committed an act of violence.

You have calumniated every person who posts here in opposition to homosexuality by referring to us collectively as a "hate group."

"you were the one who came to this Blog to publically announce your sodomite way of life and to denounce those of us who are morally opposed to it."

No, I came to this website more than a year ago to talk to Catholics about how I fell away from the Church. I wanted people to know the story of how I lived as everyone asked, yet that was not good enough. I was still forced out of the Church by uncaring people who think they are better than others.

"But we aren't the ones lacking peace Mr. Hosty."

You cannot pretend to be at peace while simultaneously casting dispersions against your peaceful neighbors. Prove your peace, don't tell me. Be the light of Christ He commands you to be and not to boding of darkness your own feelings bring you.

William writes:

"John Hosty challenges me with the following comment: "Here is your opportunity to show the public you are not lying William. Where have I threatened anyone?"

When you posted the following comment: "Your public support of hatred has been noted," you were issuing a veiled threat."

How is standing up and saying I notice your support of a hate group a threat? Sounds to me like you want to accuse things of your neighbors yet lack the ability to prove what you accuse.

Then you go on to accuse me of doing the very same thing you are guilty of:

"When you bear false witness against your neighbors (and we are all neighbors John), you commit a terrible act of violence against them."

You say that I bear false witness against Cirignano, Melanson, and Jay G., yet never actually come up with what it is I said that was inaccurate. I reported Cirignano's events and cited all sources. I have called Melanson and Jay bigots because of their intollerance; that's what it is.

But you my friend have been evolving facts into your own version of the truth. I have never once accused this website as being a collective hate group, yet you say of me "...referring to us collectively as a "hate group."

This is another lie, just like when you said I hate God. You are upset that I can stand my ground and call you out on your actions, so this is what you have come up with in your defense; a smokescreen of lies. The only trouble for you is that they are not very convincing lies since anyone can scroll up the conversation and see for themselves.

Lies are the Devil's work even when they are meant to protect whom you love. You will be judged by God for all these wrongs you have committed against me, this I am sure of.

Rather than allow these mistruths you speak bother me I will let them energize me and wash over me, for it is His will that is most important, and every time I turn the other cheek at your insults His love is communicated.

I love all of you in spite of how you treat GLBT people. Perhaps one day there will be an event in your life powerful enough for you to learn what you are doing here is wrong. I hope that day comes soon so you will have time to do some good before it's too late.

For those of you who are emailing me your anonymous support, thank you.

Christ does not encourage us to hate one another, no matter who tells you so. You can read the Bible for yourself and arrive at the same conclusion as I do, for they are His way. He did not lay down His life just for the good, but also for the ungrateful, and also for His enemies.

Know that you are not alone in your love. Here is a link for you to see that there are many others like you who are questioning those who would use God as a divisive tool:

Rather than let their hate corrupt our own hearts, let's help bring these people peace by showing our love to them. Do not get angry when they say viscious things, it is only fear talking through them.

As it is written all knees shall bend before Him and in doing so find true peace. Let Him be our judge and we be the sheep that follow His command to love each other.

John, you came here to promote the Gospel of Sodomy. And because we refuse to affirm your sodomite lifestyle, you have continually issued insults and calumnies.

You are not at peace with your neighbor because you are not at peace with God.

I would urge you to make a good sacramental confession and to abandon your sodomite lifestyle. Until you get right with God, your hatred will continue to consume you like a cancer.

Since you find us so "disagreeable" as Roman Catholics who accept the Church's teaching on homosexuality, perhaps the prudent thing to do would be to cease coming here? You have called us bigots. And yet you continue to come here to insult us. Think about that John. You seem unable to avoid this one tiny Blog [I say tiny but not insignificant - this is a great Blog]in a cyberspace that is teeming with websites and Blogs.

Return to the sacraments John. Return to a life of prayer and penance. Then you will have true peace.

John Hosty writes, "You say that I bear false witness against Cirignano, Melanson, and Jay G., yet never actually come up with what it is I said that was inaccurate. I reported Cirignano's events and cited all sources. I have called Melanson and Jay bigots because of their intollerance; that's what it is."

ut again this character is engaging in dishonesty. Larry was unanimously acquited in a Court of law. The facts proved him innocent. Yet John Hosty continued to insist upon his guilt.

And by referring to Paul and Jay as "bigots," John Hosty is once again engaging in calumny. Mr. Hosty has now publically labelledPaul Melanson a bigot four times. Three times at this Blog and once at La Salette Journey. And yet, he is unable to produce any evidence of this "bigotry." In fact, while Mr. Hosty continues to publically attack and villify Mr. Melanson with calumny, Mr. Melanson has been very gracious and has remained silent.

Mr. Hosty's hate is revealed more and more with each and every comment he writes at this Blog. Let's all pray that this angry individual will be granted sufficient grace to confess his hatred and to make atonement for his hurtful attacks on faithful Catholics loyal to the Magisterium of the Church.

Michael, well said. John Hosty has not been able to produce any evidence whatsoever to corroborate his wild accusation that Paul Melanson and JayG are "bigots." Now that you have challenged him on this point, he has fallen silent. Silence is often the last refuge of the scoundrel. And make no mistake about it, a person who levels false accusations against others IS a scoundrel.

I second your challenge to John Hosty. Let this scoundrel produce evidence of bigotry on the part of Paul Melanson or JayG. Let him produce evidence to corroborate his accusations against Larry Cirigano. A jury found him not guilty and did so unanimously.

Come on John: produce your "evidence." And if you cannot, then repent of your falsehoods.

I live in New Hampshire and follow politics more closely than you do. And I have always opposed homosexuality....always.

I cannot help but notice that you avoided answering my question. I won't ask this question again. Since you have already refused to answer my question, I take this as an admission of your own dishonesty.

You are not only a hater of God and His Commandments, you are a liar who makes unsubstantiated claims against those who won't embrace your homosexual agitprop.

You follow politics closer than I, yet you needed to ask what petition I was talking about? That doesn't make a lot of sense. I love New Hampshire! Just last year the state legislators passed civil unions there on my 40th birthday. Live free or die is a great motto.

Marie, let go of your hate, it is the way of the Devil. When you say hateful things you are doing his work and not Christ's. Calling me a scoundrel serves no Christian purpose.

I will not hold this against you. It is up to God to forgive you of your indiscretions. You may not feel the shame you should for your behavior but others see what you have done. You should remember that God is watching.

John, your hatred here has been noted time and again. In calling you a scoundrel, Marie isn't engaging in hate. She is practicing truth in advertising. You have repeatedly calumniated Paul, Jay and Larry. You have offered no evidence to back up your slanderous accusations.

Scoundrel (Noun) - a wicked or evil person; someone who does evil deliberately.

Acts of sodomy are evil. Calumniating another is evil.If one does these things willingly and deliberately, one is a scoundrel.

Note well all who visit this discussion thread: John Hosty has publically calumniated several Catholic defenders of the faith. He has been challenged to corroborate his allegations and has refused to do so.

Conclusion: we have a radical homosexual activist who cannot tell the truth when challenged to do so.

Pray for this angry person. Pray that he will repent of his sodomite "lifestyle" and his commitment toward engaging in lies.

May Christ give you the strength to resist Satan's grasp and turn from your malicious comments against me. May He also comtinue to empower me with the patience to endure all your insults.

By His stripes we are redeemed. Isaiah 53:5

Since you have locked your jaws on the idea I cannot answer your questions let me answer them so you can focus on something else.

With the Larry Cirignano issue you'll have to be more specific since I covered the story from it's genesis. What have I said that you have a problem with?

As far as Paul Melanson and Jay G. go, I called them bigots because of the behavior they have exhibited. Let's review again the definition of a bigot:

from the Merriam-Webster Dictionary:

bigot

Main Entry: big·ot Pronunciation: \ˈbi-gət\ Function: noun Etymology: French, hypocrite, bigot Date: 1660 : a person obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices; especially : one who regards or treats the members of a group (as a racial or ethnic group) with hatred and intolerance.

Paul has so little respect for me he won't even talk with me; only about me. It seems that I and others like me are untermenschen to him.

Jay G. has this website focused on the hatred of GLBT people. Evidence of this can be seen by his articles, his comments, and his link to a known hate group on his front page.

They both fit the definition of a bigot via their actions, so I feel I am using the proper word. The best defense against being called a bigot is not to let it be true.

People here just don't seem to get it. You have nothing to offer me. I am not here trying to win your approval, which I do not need or desire.

I'm here to save you from yourselves and the hatred you show. It is consuming you, and if you don't let it go you will have focused your lives away without the joy that could have been in its place.

One of the few unforgivable blesphemy's you can commit is by turning life into a burden instead of the miraculous joy it should be.

Focus not a single minute more on berating me. Instead, focus on joy, love, peace, and the spreading of these feelings. Then you will be far closer to Christ and what He wants of us.

Let us pray together the words of St. Francis of Asissi:

Lord, make me an instrument of thy peace.Where there is hatred, let me sow love.Where there is injury, pardon.Where there is doubt, faith.Where there is despair, hope.Where there is darkness, light.Where there is sadness, joy.

O Divine Master, grant that I may notso much seek to be consoled as to console;to be understood as to understand;to be loved, as to love.For it is in giving that we receive.It is in pardoning that we are pardoned.It is in dying to self that we are born to eternal life.

John H.Apparently if one does not agree with you, one is a bigot, which is a convenient way for you to avoid debate. If we come to different conclusions than you about certain lifestyle behaviors then we our bigots by your definition - of course you come to those conclusions because you engage in those same behaviors. How convenient!And again John, 1/2 the truth; The Bible does not say that Jesus died for His enemies, He died for us sinners. As long as one does not hate God their is hope. One cannot be an enemy of Christ and expect His mercy, that would cause God to contradict Himself, and would blow that whole Free Will thing right out of the Spiritual water. You really need to try to quote Scripture accurately instead of conveniently, instead of selectively, instead of by half.

Jay, would you call yourself tolerant of GLBT people? Feel free to explain why you are not a bigot. I in no way wish to avoid debate, so by all means do continue. By the way, it is not my definition you are being measured by, it is the non-biased standard cited.

Also, I never said that the Bible said Jesus died for His enemies. It is something you should be able to discern from His teachings for yourself. He died so all sins would be forgiven, even for the ungrateful and His enemies.

There is no half truth or misunderstanding here, just an acknowledgement of Christ's perfect love.

"The Way" was the first name for Christianity evolved into the Catholic Church and was around before the Bible. His truth is felt in our hearts and helps to guide our judgment when we listen.

The Bible is an attempt to convey that truth onto those who would listen. As the years have gone along that message is being diluted by each hand that re-writes what He said. This can be seen in the many versions of the Bible.

This is why we should put our faith in our hearts and not so much in the written word. If we have to focus on the Bible let us focus on Christ's words:

John 20:21

Again Jesus said, "Peace be with you! As the Father has sent me, I am sending you."

Let us pick up His torch and light the way for each other, bringing peace to those in need.

John, you have no peace. Your words and actions illustrate that fact. You have once again refused to provide us with evidence of bigotry on the part of Jay, Paul and Larry.

You are so filled with contempt and arrogance toward those of us who refuse to affirm you in your sinful "lifestyle" that you write, "You have nothing to offer me. I am not here trying to win your approval, which I do not need or desire."

In your mind, because we are faithful Christians who refuse to pander to your sodomite "lifetsyle", we have "nothing to offer." You say that you are not coming here to seek our approval and yet you castigate us when we disagree with you, referring to us as "bigots."

By your own admission, you violate the Commandments of God. You actually stated as much in a previous post. This is why you lack peace and are so filled with hatred and rage.

I would urge you to repent of your sodomite "lifestyle" and your calumnies directed at those who adhere to Magisterial teaching.

I would also urge you to reflect upon this fact: You write, "Paul has so little respect for me he won't even talk with me; only about me. It seems that I and others like me are untermenschen to him."

Paul is on record as teaching that homosexual acts are gravely sinful. But he is also on record as respecting homosexual persons. If Paul won't talk with you, it is because you have calumniated him (and others) and have proven yourself incapable of any authentic dialogue.

I would encourage you to not just recite the Prayer of St. Francis, but to actually pray the prayer and attempt to incorporate what it says into your life.

You are not sowing love, peace and understanding here John. You are sowing hatred, division, dissension, and disunity.

Repent John. Return to the Church. Put away your pride and submit yourself to the Lord Jesus. Then peace will come to you. Then you will be able to engage in real dialogue with others.

Until then, you will constantly be engaged in quarrels and dissension. As is evidenced by your quarrels with other Christians at other websites such as Massachusetts Conservative Christian.

Paul Melanson has shown "contempt" for homosexual persons John? I wonder if you realize how silly that accusation really is?

Paul started a discussion thread on the principles of dialogue at the Holy Cross Cardinal Newman Society website back in June of 2005. Because people on both sides of the issue were issuing inappropriate comments, Paul wrote:

"Dear Friends,

The moderator of this forum has intervened because of a recent discussion on the subject of homosexuality. And rightfully so. It is important to remember that all communication should be open to community, and mutual good will and honor are essential for that purpose. Pleasantness in speech and manner manifests good will and the desire to please others. Marks of courtesy, such as polite words, manifest not only respect for persons insofar as they are persons, but the honor appropriate for each in accord with his or her social status, the relationship of persons, and other circumstances (see S.t.. 2-2, q. 114, a.1).

Therefore, in communicating, people should always be courteous and pleasant (see Colossians 4:6), unless it is unavoidable to sadden others or there is some reason for not trying to please them.

There will never be any authentic dialogue at this forum if various persons or parties refuse to acknowledge that communication should be self-expression in love. And, as a result, only that should be communicated which will benefit others and build up genuine community.

In every communication, one should try to manifest love, respect, and due honor, not only for those who are addressed but toward everyone mentioned: "Love one another with mutual affection; outdo one another in showing honor" (Romans 12:10); "Let no evil talk come out of your mouths, but only what is useful for building up, as there is need, so that your words may give grace to those who hear" (Ephesians 4:29).

I have witnessed harsh communication arising from both sides of the particular debate in question. Rather than engaging in finger pointing and further inappropriate rhetoric, both sides in this issue (and any other) should always the Scripture which says, "A harsh word stirs up anger, but a mild answer calms wrath."

Ultimately it is love that convinces more than anything else. Angry words will never change anyone's mind or convince them of one's beliefs. The truth, spoken in love and in respect for others, well....that is a different story.

God love you all, Paul Anthony Melanson"(Comment of June 29, 2005).

And when someone named Dale used an inappropriate label here at DTF directed at homosexual persons, a woman named Renee called the comment "inappropriate" to which Paul added:

"I would have to come down on Renee's side on this issue. While it is important that we remain fortes in Fide at all times, still, charity must be our norm. Dale's posting was over the top in my opinion as he employed the use of an expletive. However, in the same vein, Mr. John Hosty's post in which he refers to the views of others who frequent this forum as "B.S." should also be deemed inappropriate." (Comment left at 10:07 AM) under the discussion thread titled "Friend of the Court).

So you see John, it is not Paul who is a bigot. It is not Paul who is intolerant of others while disagreeing with their views. It is you.

But you do sadly. Paul has shown you respect while disagreeing with your views and has even defended your person from an inappropriate comment. But you have continued to publically smear him as a bigot as he remains silent in the face of your hatred.

Would that all Christians could practice such patience. You should be ashamed of yourself.

I'll be honest, this just sounds mean spirited. Why would you say such a thing?

"You have once again refused to provide us with evidence of bigotry on the part of Jay, Paul and Larry."

Perhaps if you told me what type of evidence you are looking for to qualify the word I could provide it. I don't know what it is you want, so we are at an impass.

"You are so filled with contempt and arrogance toward those of us who refuse to affirm you in your sinful "lifestyle" that you write, "You have nothing to offer me. I am not here trying to win your approval, which I do not need or desire."

On the contrary, I am filled with love for my fellow man. I do not seek anything from you, I only want to give you peace that I have found through Him. This peace allows we in Salem to live side by side with all sorts of diversities, including fundamental Christians.

"In your mind, because we are faithful Christians who refuse to pander to your sodomite "lifetsyle", we have "nothing to offer."

You are not God. Only He can look into the heart of a man and see what he thinks.

"You say that you are not coming here to seek our approval and yet you castigate us when we disagree with you, referring to us as "bigots."

It is not in disagreeing with me that I find bigotry. That would not fit the definition of the word. It is intolerance to the point of being dishonest about me that I find fault in. Christ knows the malevolence in your heart as you say I "hate God", and you will have to answer to Him for actions like this. I merely point it out so you can do something about it.

"By your own admission, you violate the Commandments of God."

We are all sinners in God's view. I am humble enough to say that I am a sinner, and to try each day to be as Christ commands to my neighbors, regardless of the scorn and contempt they show for my efforts.

I do not believe that Christ was against homosexuality however, and I do not believe that what Paul writes about this was His will.

"But he is also on record as respecting homosexual persons."

May I ask where Paul has been seen talking respectfully to those in the GLBT community so I can see this for myself? According to my memory Paul had chosen to ignore my comment on his blog before I had a chance to call him out as a bigot.

"You are not sowing love, peace and understanding here John. You are sowing hatred, division, dissension, and disunity."

I have been reciting the words of Christ and the prayers of saints. If you find these things in those words it is on your shoulders.

"Until then, you will constantly be engaged in quarrels and dissension. As is evidenced by your quarrels with other Christians at other websites such as Massachusetts Conservative Christian."

Tyler, in my opinion, is an "ex-gay" who is attempting to lead a straight lifestyle at the expense of straight people who love him. That is a very dangerous road, not only for the person who attempts this "conversion", but for the people around who are caught up in this lie. It is better to live as you are and not try to conform to society for society's sake.

Is it better to live as Ted Haggard did and hurt his family, or to live as an openly gay man?

To John I say that you should live the words instead of reciting them. In them you would find no need to tell me I should be ashamed.

Paul needs to belly up to the bar and stand by what he has said. The fact he would not allow me to comment, even as respectfully as I did on his blog shows another side of him which I bring light upon.

The words are beautiful, but the actions are lacking. Words without action are nothing to crow about.

May God help all of you here see the error of your continued abuse and help guide you away from it.

By Paul's quote we find wisdom:

"In every communication, one should try to manifest love, respect, and due honor, not only for those who are addressed but toward everyone mentioned: "Love one another with mutual affection; outdo one another in showing honor" (Romans 12:10)

John, you still haven't produced any evidence of "bigotry" at this Blog or at Paul's. It is time for you to acknowledge your own dishonesty as well as your hatred of those who disagree with you. Labelling orthodox Christians "bigots" because they accept what Divine Revelation and Natural Law have to say about homosexual acts is demonic. Your actions are demonic.

Repent of your hatred John. Return to the sacraments and Christ will give you His peace. Lacking sanctifying grace as you do, you will never have peace. Only the incessant anger you have displayed at this forum.

The Catechism (the teaching of which Mr. Hosty rejects) says that, "Peace is 'the tranquility of order.' Peace is the work of justice and the effect of charity." (Catechism of the Catholic Church, 2304).

Peace is a fruit and gift of the Holy Spirit. But the Holy Spirit cannot impart His peace to the soul mired in mortal sin, and certainly not a sin which cries to Heaven (1867 of the Catechism).

Jesus said that without Him, we can do nothing. If our souls lack sanctifying grace because we are living in mortal sin, we cannot have peace. Such is impossible.

William, you are right in exhorting Mr. Hosty to make a sacramental confession. Mortal sin, unrepented of, leads to an eternity in Hell and robs one of peace in this life.

I will not be returning to attempt "dialogue" with Mr. Hosty. Dialogue with a soul determined to live in mortal sin is not possible. Such a person is living in darkness and is unable to see the truth.

I will instead just pray for him. And I would advise others to have nothing to do with him until such time as he returns to the Church. Again, dialogue with a contentious man determined to live in mortal sin is not possible. The Scriptures exhort us to have nothing to do with such a person. Not even to welcome them in our homes. Or we become sharers in their iniquity, in their evil works.

We have no need of your "forgiveness." You have need of ours. For it is you who have engaged in hatred here and who have slandered the good name of Catholics who disagree with your homosexual agitprop.

More importantly, you have need of making a sacramental confession. Homosexual acts are gravely sinful as is slander.

The peace we have is from Jesus. You do not have this peace. If you did, you wouldn't keep returning here to sow discord and hatred.

Your way is not the way of Christ. Your slander of good Catholics is the way of another Father (John 8:44). Every lie has its origin in this Father of Lies John. And whether you realize it or not, you are doing his bidding and following his example. It was this same Father of Lies who said, "Non serviam" - I will not serve. Likewise, you refuse to serve the Lord Jesus and to obey His Commandments.

Your hatred and your animosity condemn you John. We don't hate you as you hate us. We hate the sin which you embrace and are trying to promote here.

You will not wear us down nor will you get us to lash out against you as you have done repeatedly to us. We forgive you John. We forgive your hate and your lies. We forgive your slander and your rejection of Christ's teaching.

But we will never be intimidated by you. We will never succumb to your pity trips and your false portrayal of yourself as a "victim."

We Christians are the victims here. We are martyrs to your unbridled hate campaign and your campaign of lies.

But we forgive you John. We know that your hatred and your lack of intellectual prowess are the result of sin. As the Editors over at Roman Catholic Faithful told Senator Daschle, "Sin makes you stupid." This is Scriptural teaching. Romans 1 says that "declaring themselves to be wise they became fools."

This is why I said that you are dull normal at best. And I was being generous. You never present an intelligent or coherent argument. You never refute Catholic teaching (which is impossible anyway) with any intelligent argument.

You have nothing to offer because you are an ignoramus. Sin makes one stupid John. Instead of repeatedly playing the victim like the broken record which your posts have become, why not simply move on John? Your obviously not equipped to post anything meaningful here.

And before you complain that my comment is "mean' or "hurtful" John, remember this truth: you get back from others what you give. We have been patient with you for quite some time now. But since you're so obviously committed toward dishing it out John, I suggest you grow a pair and learn how to take it.

Be a man John. I know that's very difficult for you. But give it a try. And if you cannot stand the heat....you know the rest.

My way is of a sinner trying to find Christ. Your lack of neighborliness is also not the way of Christ. John Ansley quoted Paul M. in saying that we should all be respectful to one another. You'll trampled that thought, and it is not for Christ's sake but rather for your own hatred you do so.

"Your slander of good Catholics is the way of another Father (John 8:44)."

I have not slandered anyone, I have presented the facts you find inconvenient.

"Every lie has its origin in this Father of Lies John. And whether you realize it or not, you are doing his bidding and following his example. It was this same Father of Lies who said, "Non serviam" - I will not serve. Likewise, you refuse to serve the Lord Jesus and to obey His Commandments."

You should remember that the next time to try to vilify me with dishonesty and say I hate God and my neighors. No one hates God. If sinning was all that was required to say of someone that they hate God then I suppose you do too since we are all sinners.

"Your hatred and your animosity condemn you John."

Again, you cannot look into my heart to see what I really feel, leaving God the one who is truly just in His judgment. My actions do not show hatred, they show forgiveness and a desire to work together.

"We don't hate you as you hate us."

Why not try stopping with the invective? Could it hurt?

"We hate the sin which you embrace and are trying to promote here."

What I am trying to promote is an understanding of what unconditional love is. It means loving someone even when they treat others like you are treating me. It shows the kindness and forgiveness of His way. This is how Christians are called to conduct themselves. In behaving this way others who are ignorant of Christ see our joy and want it for themselves. You are hardly wowing anyone with that joy Marie.

"You will not wear us down..."

Where did you get the idea I was wanting to wear you down? If anything I think you have been trying to be mean spirited enough to get ME, to go away. Christ commands that we try to be as loving neighbors, so I am here.

"...nor will you get us to lash out against you as you have done repeatedly to us."

Marie, you are in charge of your own actions. This is a line right out of a domestic abuse flyer, "look what you made me do!" If you are ashamed for lashing out like you have in the past, cut it out. It is as wrong now as it was then and it has no place in dialog between two Christians.

"We forgive you John."

I forgive you too Maire, and I love you as Christ commands. That why I am here is to prove that love whatever way I need to.

We forgive your hate and your lies."

As before, I forgive you for this, but it is He that you should ask for forgiveness from. In your attempt to paint me as an Anti-Christ you have made grave misrepresentations of the truth which you will have to account for on Judgment Day.

"We forgive your slander..."

I forgive you for saying I slander anyone while I talk openly about things you wish weren't true.

"...and your rejection of Christ's teaching."

I recite Christ's teachings constantly here verbatum. Please don't start saying yet another new lie against me. My how deep the whole is you are digging for yourself.

"But we will never be intimidated by you."

Good, becuae I have never once tried to intimidate you. Saying that you won't be intimidated is a tactic used to imply that I have to others who have not followed the conversation however, and that is yet another dishonesty you'll have to come to terms with.

"We will never succumb to your pity trips and your false portrayal of yourself as a victim."

You have nothing to offer me here, you are the ones who need to be saved from your hatred and lies. That is why Christ has called me to come to you. His will is being done, not ours.

"We Christians are the victims here."

You don't get the right to say who is a Christian and who is not. I follow Christ's words, and His desire for peace and joy brings me here to share it with you. I find it kind of arrogant for you to try painting me out of God's picture like you have say.

"We are martyrs to your unbridled hate campaign and your campaign of lies."

If you are a martyr, what have you given up for me?

"But we forgive you John."

As they say in Missori, "Show me."

"We know that your hatred and your lack of intellectual prowess are the result of sin. As the Editors over at Roman Catholic Faithful told Senator Daschle, "Sin makes you stupid." This is Scriptural teaching." Romans 1 says that "declaring themselves to be wise they became fools."

It's funny that you bring up Romans 1 because I was reading this the other day and thinking of you. How easy is it to be kind and spread joy, yet how very difficult you make it seem.

"why not simply move on John?"

I spared the bother of addressing the multitude of insults I find this one point in. Why? Because Christ would leave His flock to find the one who is lost. I find you lost in your hatred of someone you don't even know, that's how hateful you are. You ask me to leave you behind in the sea of misery saying that you are happy here, but I cannot in good conscience allow my neighbor to be so injured and alone.

John, no one's buying your victimhood. You came here displaying your hatred of God and neighbor. Your hatred of God by openly embracing the gospel of sodomy and rejecting His Commandments; your hatred of neighbor by calumniating Paul Melanson, JayG and Larry Cirignano as well as all of us who oppose homosexuality because of the teaching of Sacred Scripture and Tradition.

Your lies and your hatred have now been extensively documented. Your contempt for Jesus' Commandments and for your neighbor is chilling.

I would urge you to make a good sacramental confession and to repent of your hate.

No, you hate God. This is proven by the fact that you reject His Commandments (John 14:15). Your rejection of Christ's Commandments and your preference for your own will is proof that you hate the Lord Jesus.

Jesus said that not everyone who says "Lord, Lord" will enter the Kingdom of Heaven but only those who do His Father's Will.

He will say to such people, "Depart from Me you accursed, I do not know you."

I am gay. This is my only crime. I search my heart and find God calling me to be the best person I can and forget about what I cannot control.

I have been blessed with a supportive family and many friends who almost all are both straight and Catholic. They look past my shortcomings as I do for them as God would have us do.

Their actions prove to me that what you are doing is not God's will, it is your own because it is not founded in love. You can stand firmly on your principles without insulting or degrading someone else. This action cheapens you and your points. Words like "scoundrel", "demonic", and "Anti-Christ" are all examples of going too far.

Perhaps some day I will come to see acting on homosexuality as something against God, but that epiphany will not come from your denegration. It will come from loving examples of Christ that make me want to be like Him. Your way shows me to hate myself and to fear God. I would rather be in love than in fear. Your way takes the miracle life is and turns it into a curse for GLBT people. So many children have taken their own lives because of talk like yours. I don't want to be responsible for that by standing back and saying nothing.

As the Cardinal has quoted, "All evil needs in order to be triumphant is for good men to do nothing."

This seems so foriegn to you that it hurts my heart. You seem so lost in your hatred of GLBT people that you seem to have lost your path. That's why I come here, to help you find a better way.

Disagree all you want, but do it in a civil manner that does not hurt anyone. Leave your insults behind, He has no use for them.

Dr. Cameron is Chariman of the Family Research Institute of Colorado Springs, Colorado USA.

Ann Landers says the statement "Homosexuals are more inclined to molest children sexually than heterosexuals" is false. The American Psychological Association has sponsored a work that asserts: "Recognized researchers in the field on child abuse,... almost unanimously concur that homosexual people are actually less likely to approach children sexually."

Why is it, then, that we read about sex between boys and men in every newspaper? Does it merely reflect sensationalist journalism? We know that heterosexual molestation also occurs. But since there are so many more heterosexuals than homosexuals, which kind of child molestation – homosexual or heterosexual – is proportionately more common?

The Scientific Evidence

Three kinds of scientific evidence point to the proportion of homosexual molestation: 1) survey reports of molestation in the general population, 2) surveys of those caught and convicted of molestation, and 3) what homosexuals themselves have reported. These three lines of evidence suggest that the 1%-to-3% of adults who practice homosexuality (3) account for between a fifth and a third of all child molestation.

Reports of Molestation by the General Population

In 1983, a probability survey of the sexual experiences of 4,340 adults in 5 U.S. cities found that about 3% of men and 7% of women reported sexual involvement with a man before the age of 134 (i.e., 30% was homosexual).

In 1983, a random survey of 3,132 adults in Los Angeles found that 3.8% of men and 6.8% of women said that they had been sexually assaulted in childhood. Since 93% of the assailants were male, and only 1% of girls had been assaulted by females, about 35% of the assaults were homosexual.

The Los Angeles Times surveyed 2,628 adults across the U.S. in 1985. 27% of the women and 16% of the men claimed to have been sexually molested. Since 7% of the molestations of girls and 93% of the molestations of boys were by adults of the same sex, about 4 of every 10 molestations in this survey were homosexual.

In a random survey of British 15-to-19 yr olds, 35% of the boys and 9% of the girls claimed to have been approached for sex by adult homosexuals and 2% of the boys and 1% of the girls admitted to succumbing.

In science, a review of the professional literature published in a refereed scientific journal is considered to be an accurate summary of the current state of knowledge. The latest such review was published in 1985. It concluded that homosexual acts were involved in 25% to 40% of the cases of child molestation recorded in the scientific and forensic literature.

Surveys of Those Convicted

Drs Freund and Heasman of the Clarke Institute of Psychiatry in Toronto reviewed two sizeable studies and calculated that 34% and 32% of the offenders against children were homosexual. In cases they had personally handled, homosexuals accounted for 36% of their 457 pedophiles.

Dr. Adrian Copeland, a psychiatrist who works with sexual offenders at the Peters Institute in Philadelphia, said that, from his experience, pedophiles tend to be homosexual and "40% to 45%" of child molesters have had "significant homosexual experiences."

Dr. C. H. McGaghy estimated that "homosexual offenders probably constitute about half of molesters who work with children." Other studies are similar:

– Of the approximately 100 child molesters in 1991 at the Massachusetts Treatment Center for Sexually Dangerous Persons, a third were heterosexual, a third bisexual and a third homosexual in orientation.

– A state-wide survey of 161 Vermont adolescents who committed sex offenses in 1984 found that 35 (22%) were homosexual.

– Of the 91 molesters of non-related children at Canada’s Kingston Sexual Behaviour Clinic from 1978-1984, 38 (42%) engaged in homosexuality.

– Of 52 child molesters in Ottawa from 1983 to 1985, 31 (60%) were homosexual.

– In England for 1973, 802 persons (8 females) were convicted of indecent assault on a male, and 3,006 (6 of them female) were convicted of indecent assault on a female (i.e., 21% were homosexual). 88% of male and about 70% of female victims were under age sixteen.

Because of this pattern, Judge J. T. Rees concluded that "the male homosexual naturally seeks the company of the male adolescent, or of the young male adult, in preference to that of the fully-grown man. [In 1947] 986 persons were convicted of homosexual and unnatural offences. Of those, 257 were indictable offences involving 402 male victims.... The great majority of [whom]... were under the age of 16. Only 11%... were over 21."

"[T]he problem of male homosexuality is in essence the problem of the corruption of youth by itself [i.e., by other boys] and by its elders. [And thereby]... the creation... of new addicts ready to corrupt a still further generation of young men and boys in the future."

What Homosexuals Admit

The 1948 Kinsey survey found that 37% of the gays and 2% of the lesbians admitted to sexual relations with under-17-yr-olds, and 28% of the gays and 1% of the lesbians admitted to sexual relations with under-16-yr-olds while they themselves were aged 18 or older.

In 1970 the Kinsey Institute interviewed 565 white gays in San Francisco: 25% of them admitted to having had sex with boys aged 16 or younger while they themselves were at least 21.

In The Gay Report, 23% of the gays and 6% of the lesbians admitted to sexual interaction with youth less than 16 years of age.

In France, 129 convicted gays (21)(average age 34 years) said they had had sexual contact with a total of 11,007 boys (an average of 85 different boys per man). Abel et al reported similarly that men who molested girls outside their family had averaged 20 victims each; those who molested boys averaged 150 victims each.

Summary

About a third of the reports of molestation by the populace have involved homosexuality. Likewise, between a fifth and a third of those who have been caught and/or convicted practiced homosexuality. Finally, a fifth to a third of surveyed gays admitted to child molestation. All-in-all, a rather consistent story.

Teacher-Pupil Sexual Interaction

Nowadays parents are labeled bigots for fearing that homosexual teachers might molest their children. But if homosexuals are more apt to molest children and are in a positon to take advantage of them, this fear makes sense. Indeed, accounts of disproportionate homosexual teacher molestation appear throughout the scientific literature.

The original U.S. Kinsey study reported that 4% of the non-criminal white gays and 7% of the non-criminal white lesbians reported that they had their first homosexual experience with a ‘teacher or other caretaker.’ None of the heterosexuals were recorded as having a teacher as their first sex partner.

In England, Schofield reported that at least 2 of his 150 homosexuals had their first homosexual experience with a teacher and an additional 2 reported that their first homosexual contact with an adult was with a teacher. One of the 50 men in his comparison group had also been seduced by a homosexual teacher, while none of the men interviewed claimed involvement with a heterosexual teacher.

In the 1978 McCall’s magazine study of 1,400 principals, 7% reported complaints about homosexual contact between teachers and pupils and 13% reported complaints about heterosexual contact between teachers and pupils (i.e., 35% of complaints were homosexual). 2% "knew of instances in which teachers discussed their homosexuality in class."

Of 400 consecutive Australian cases of molestation, 7 boys and 4girls were assaulted by male teachers. Thus 64% of those assaults were homosexual.

A 1983 survey asked 4,340 adults to report on any sexual advances and any physical sexual contact by elementary and secondary teachers (4% of those who were teachers in the survey claimed to be bisexual or homosexual).4 29% of the advances by elementary and 16% of the advances by secondary school teachers were homosexual. In addition, 1 of 4 (25%) reports of actual sexual contact with an elementary school teacher were homosexual. In high school, 8 (22%) of 37 contacts between teacher and pupil were homosexual. 18% reported having had a homosexual teacher (8% of those over the age of 55 vs 25% of those under 26). Of those reporting a homosexual teacher, 6% said that the teacher influenced them to try homosexuality and 13% of the men and 4% of the women said that the teacher made sexual advances toward them.

Summary

Whether examining surveys of the general populace or counts of those caught, homosexual teachers are disproportionately apt to become sexually involved with children.

Proportionality: The Key

Study after nationwide study has yielded estimates of male homosexuality that range between 1% and 3%. The proportion of lesbians in these studies is almost always lower, usually about half that of gays. So, overall, perhaps 2% of adults regularly indulge in homosexuality. Yet they account for between 20% to 40% of all molestations of children.

Child molestation is not to be taken lightly. Officials at a facility which serves about 1,500 runaway youngsters each year estimate that about half of the boys have been homosexually abused and 90% of the girls heterosexually assaulted. Investigation of those suffering severe chronic mental illness implicates child molestation as a primary cause (45% of Bigras et al’s (28) patients were homosexually abused).

If 2% of the population is responsible for 20% to 40% of something as socially and personally troubling as child molestation, something must be desperately wrong with that 2%. Not every homosexual is a child molester. But enough gays do molest children so that the risk of a homosexual molesting a child is 10 to 20 times greater than that of a heterosexual.

Goals of the Gay Movement

The gay movement is forthright about seeking to legitimize child-adult homosexual sex. In 1987, The Journal of Homosexuality – the scholarly organ of the gay rights movement – published "Pedophilia and the Gay Movement." Author Theo Sandfort detailed homosexual efforts to end "oppression towards pedophilia." In 1980 the largest Dutch gay organization (the COC) "adopted the position that the liberation of pedophilia must be viewed as a gay issue... [and that] ages of consent should therefore be abolished... by acknowledging the affinity between homosexuality and pedophilia, the COC has quite possibly made it easier for homosexual adults to become more sensitive to erotic desires of younger members of their sex, thereby broadening gay identity."

In 1990 COC achieved a significant victory: lowering of the age of consent for homosexual sex in Holland to 12 (unless the parents object, in which case it goes up to 15). In the U.S. and Canada, the North American Man-Boy Love Association marches proudly in many gay pride parades with the stated goal of removing the barriers to man-boy sex. Note the phrases "oppression towards pedophilia" and "liberation of pedophilia." It is clear that those who advocate the legalization of sex between adults and children intend to argue that such conduct is a "civil right," deserving of the same legal protections afforded to other minorities. A large proportion of Americans regard that argument as a mere pretext to giving "sexual predators" free reign to take advantage of vulnerable children.

Conclusion

Not only is the gay rights movement upfront in its desire to legitimize sex with children, but whether indexed by population reports of molestation, pedophile convictions, or teacher-pupil assaults, there is a strong, disproportionate association between child molestation and homosexuality. Ann Landers’ claim that homosexuals molest children at no higher a rate than heterosexuals do is untrue. The assertion by gay leaders and the American Psychological Association that a homosexual is less likely than a heterosexual to molest children is patently false.

__________________________

Since the goal of the homosexual movement is to "legitimize child-adult homosexual sex," the time has come to ask John Hosty if he supports adult-child homosexual sex.

As you will see, my life is quite wonderful. All I want is to share the peace and love I have found through Him. With Him the impossible becomes true, like you lowering your guard and seeing the friend wating patiently before you.

For those of you interested, here is a bit of information about "dr." Cameron:

On December 2, 1983, the American Psychological Association sent Paul Cameron a letter informing him that he had been dropped from membership. Early in 1984, all members of the American Psychological Association received official written notice that "Paul Cameron (Nebraska) was dropped from membership for a violation of the Preamble to the Ethical Principles of Psychologists" by the APA Board of Directors.

Gerry, you can't help but notice that this psychologically disturbed homosexualist is dominating this Blog and promoting sodomy. He has even posted a link to his so-called "wedding" photos and has continuously posted slanderous remarks about Catholics who oppose his Queer Theology.

WEST CONSHOHOCKEN, July 25, 2005 (LifeSiteNews) - In an interview with the Rome-based Zenit news service, Dr. Rick Fitzgibbons a psychiatrist and member of the Catholic Medical Association, said that the American Psychiatric Association (APA) has ignored evidence that homosexual behaviour is a manifestation of a psychiatric disorder. In their recent call for the legalization of homosexual marriage, the APA has revealed a political bias that is of no service to homosexuals, said Fitzgibbons the primary author of the Catholic Medical Association's document 'Homosexuality and Hope.'

Fitzgibbons, the co-author of a book on forgiveness published by the APA, said the APA has also chosen to ignore the potential impact on children in those "marriages." It is being increasingly proven that children have a critical psychological need for a stable family life with a mother and a father, which the homosexual lifestyle cannot provide.

At the APA's most recent convention in Atlanta, the 250 delegates passed a resolution stating, "In the interests of maintaining and promoting mental health, the APA supports the legal recognition of same-sex civil marriage with all rights, benefits and responsibilities conferred by civil marriage, and opposes restrictions to those same rights, benefits and responsibilities."

Fitzgibbons lists a host of psychological difficulties faced by those who accept a 'homosexual orientation' as normal. He said, "These include major depression, suicidal ideation and attempts, anxiety disorders, substance abuse, conduct disorder, low self-esteem in males and sexual promiscuity with an inability to maintain committed relationships."

He noted also that, "'homophobia' is not the cause of these disorders, as many of these studies were done in cultures in which homosexuality is widely accepted." These studies, he said, along with evidence of the medical problems associated with un-natural sexual practices, have been ignored by the APA.

Other groups attempting to help individuals afflicted with homosexual tendencies also responded to the APA endorsement.

The National Association for Research and Therapy of Homosexuality (NARTH) Scientific Advisory Committee Chairman Dr. A. Dean Byrd, told the online homosexual news magazine, The Southern Voice, "There's just not science backing these policies. I think organizations ought to be guided by science, not activism."

Even one member of the APA said that the organization had overstepped its bounds. Dr. Daniel Cowell, a member of the West Virginia Psychiatrist Association said, "I think the rationale makes sense only if the APA is involved in political issues--and it most certainly is not. This strays beyond our bounds. We should stay out of it."

Sorry William, I have a strict policy of posting only under my name. I am proud of what I have to say and I don't need to hide in order to say it like you do.

Again you have broken the Ten Commandments and as you bear false witness, claiming things as true you only presume. You should repent for your sins and ask for forgiveness from God. I will hold no ill will against you; we are brothers through Christ. It is not my place to be my brother's keeper.

Everything I do is above the board and on the table for everyone to see. If you want feel free to check with Jay about the IP addresses and he should be able to verify I'm not posting as Ambivorous.

A comment is only mean if it is both hurtful and untrue. However, if a thing looks like a duck, acts like a duck, sounds like a duck....the thing is probably a duck.

Maybe he didn't sign the petition because homosexual activists like you seem hell-bent on publishing mailing addresses and issuing veiled threats such as "Your public support of hatred has been noted."

I doubt very much JayG wants you or others like you to possess his home address so that you can terrorize him and his family.

Just out of curiosity John, are you a member of NAMBLA? And why should we believe you if you claim that you are not? A prominent feature of the homosexual "community" (you people really are generous to yourselves, community indeed) is man-boy sex.

Have you had sex with boys John? Is this really what drives your perversion? Has your "partner" ever had sex with boys? How many sexual "partners" have you had John? Studies have shown that the average homosexual male has some 200 sexual "partners" during his lifetime. Do you fit this profile John?

How about the physical trauma and various health problems associated with rectal sex John? Do you suffer from Kaposi's Sarcoma? AIDS? or any other STD's? Have you ever consumed fecal material while performing what is known in the homosexual "community" as a rim job?

Don't just ask questions John. Try answering some. I realize the questions seem ugly. But then, the "lifestyle" you have chosen is ugly. Not to mention Hellish and demonic.

Actually, the homosexual "lifestyle" leads to numerous health problems. For example, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the sexually transmitted disease, syphilis, has skyrocketed among men engaging in homosexual intercourse—from 5% in 1999 to 64%

In 2004. Dr. Ronald O. Valdiserri, acting director of CDC’s HIV, STD, and TB prevention programs, emphasized the need to prevent outbreaks: “Syphilis increases, especially among men who have sex with men, demonstrate the need to continually adapt our strategies to eliminate syphilis in the United States” (“New CDC Data...,” 2005). However, as usual, “strategies to eliminate” do not include the only rational, moral solution: “Flee sexual immorality. Every sin that a man does is outside the body, but he who commits sexual immorality sins against his own body” (1 Corinthians 6:18).

Only the directives provided by the One who created human sexuality can solve the nation’s problem of widespread sexually transmitted diseases. He prescribed one man for one woman for life (Genesis 2:24). He insists that “because of sexual immorality, let each man have his own wife, and let each woman have her own husband” (1 Corinthians 7:2). If Americans would return to the Christian value system, most of our national woes would dissolve.